Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: https://health.maryland.gov/newsroom/Pages/Maryland-Department-of-Health-Monitoring-2-MD-Residents-Following-Potential-Hantavirus-Exposure-Linked-to-Hondius-Passenger.aspx

Bring on virtual learning

The incubation period ranges from four to 42 days. People should be very concerned.

Anonymous wrote: https://health.maryland.gov/newsroom/Pages/Maryland-Department-of-Health-Monitoring-2-MD-Residents-Following-Potential-Hantavirus-Exposure-Linked-to-Hondius-Passenger.aspx

Bring on virtual learning

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

The fatality rate is 38%… this is insane misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

The fatality rate is 38%… this is insane misinformation.

Retired id doc- I haven’t been following developments closely, but perhaps they are badly phrasing that the positive cases have low viral loads. There are a few different ways to test for hantavirus and one way is through pcr. There is a metric called the cycle threshold value, which is low for high viral loads and high for low viral loads. But again, I’m not sure how they are testing. They may be first testing for antibodies and then confirming with pcr.

The cdc is a ship of fools now. Thank goodness this isn’t a disease with actual pandemic potential.

Jay Bhattacharya was on point with COVID. A much better record than those who were there, especially in the data division.

Edited to add the bolded.

He is the lead fool on the ship of fools- a physician scientist who has politicized healthcare by canceling funding for studies that do not promote conservative values, by disregarding centuries of the study of infectious diseases and vaccine use and promoting herd immunity from infection rather than by vaccine use by being a “leader” in the mold of kristi noem and cultivating his image and social cache over showing up to meetings and actually doing his job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

The fatality rate is 38%… this is insane misinformation.

Retired id doc- I haven’t been following developments closely, but perhaps they are badly phrasing that the positive cases have low viral loads. There are a few different ways to test for hantavirus and one way is through pcr. There is a metric called the cycle threshold value, which is low for high viral loads and high for low viral loads. But again, I’m not sure how they are testing. They may be first testing for antibodies and then confirming with pcr.

The cdc is a ship of fools now. Thank goodness this isn’t a disease with actual pandemic potential.

Jay Bhattacharya was on point with COVID. A much better record than those who were there, especially in the data division.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

The fatality rate is 38%… this is insane misinformation.

Retired id doc- I haven’t been following developments closely, but perhaps they are badly phrasing that the positive cases have low viral loads. There are a few different ways to test for hantavirus and one way is through pcr. There is a metric called the cycle threshold value, which is low for high viral loads and high for low viral loads. But again, I’m not sure how they are testing. They may be first testing for antibodies and then confirming with pcr.

The cdc is a ship of fools now. Thank goodness this isn’t a disease with actual pandemic potential.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

The fatality rate is 38%… this is insane misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

The fatality rate is 38%… this is insane misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

It’s ridiculous. They seem so intent on not causing panic that they are not sharing vital information or severely downplaying the information shared.
You can’t tell me all of these people had prolonged close contact with the people who died. Unless this was some kind of swingers cruise??

Anonymous wrote:Late to the party but, are we thinking this will affect summer travel?

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.

Anonymous wrote:Our government today said someone only "mildly" tested positive. Your either + or - there is no mildly positive with the fatality rate of 60-70%.