Countries in Africa picked up the virus due to Italy. .Africa for the longest time just had one case in Egypt that was associated directly with China. I've posted a couple times on Africa. I figured if the virus found a foothold on the continent it would be due to China. That is still a distinct possibility, but Italy might also be a reason now.
France24 wrote on Feb 28th:
Nigeria on Friday announced the first confirmed case of the novel coronavirus in sub-Saharan Africa. "The case is an Italian citizen who works in Nigeria and returned from Milan, Italy to Lagos, Nigeria on the 25th of February 2020," Health Minister Osagie Ehanire said in a statement on Twitter.
So the individual came into the country on Tuesday and the announcement was on Friday. Since it appears to take a couple days to get the results from tests, I suspect he was out in the general public for no more than a day. But he was on a plane with people.
On Feb 22nd, the New York Post mentioned that 10 northern towns in Italy were on lockdown due to the spread of the virus that appears to have started in a bar. Well, maybe Milan should have been included in the lockdown.
South China Morning Post announced that Algeria's first case was related to an individual from Italy. That person had arrived in Algeria on Feb 17th and tested positive on Tuesday, Feb 25th. It is possible that the person was immediately put in quarantine, but I doubt it. He was probably interacting with Algerians for a number of days.
Here's a quote from the article that goes back to the idea of China:
A recent report by The Lancet singled out Algeria, Egypt and South Africa as being among the highest risk countries for new Covid-19 cases in Africa, based on their direct links and volume of travel to China.
Yeah, one would think that the first cases across the continent (such as what occurred in Egypt) would be directly tied to China and not Italy. I'm going to assume that there are probably more cases in Algeria due to the idea that the individual with Covid-19 was out among the public for a few days. Nigeria might have dodged a bullet.
The article doesn't mention where in Italy the person came from.
ABC News writes about a case hitting Brazil (the first in South America):
Brazilian Health Minister Luiz Henrique Mandetta regretted that Brazil's first case of the virus, in a 61-year-old businessman who had traveled to Italy, was confirmed in Latin America's most populous city. At the same time, Mandetta was optimistic about the government's actions to mitigate the impact.
The article does not indicate where the businessman went in Italy. Another article I read also did not give any further details.
AP writes about two cases that popped up in Mexico on Friday, February 28th:
Mexico’s Health Department said the case in Mexico City involved a 35-year-old Italian man who lives in the Mexican capital, while the Sinaloa case involves a 41-year-old resident of Hidalgo state.
The article doesn't mention if the Hidalgo resident had recently traveled from Italy. It does not mention where the Italian man lives in Italy.
Articles about Italy spreading the virus to other countries just go on and on. The reason I think 50,000 cases is a reasonable number is that I still recall how many cases were popping up in various parts of the globe who had traveled from China. I could be wrong, but I actually think the infections are popping up faster around the globe from Italy than from China. Of course, there is also more urgency to test versus when this virus first popped up in China so maybe 50,000 is too much. But still, it has to be in the high 1,000s at a minimum.
Now onto the first unknown origin case in America.
While President Trump was holding a Wednesday, Feb 26th, press conference on the topic of the coronavirus, the first case of coronavirus via unknown origins was being confirmed in Northern California. USA Today has this timeline:
The California patient was transferred to UC Davis Medical Center on Feb. 19, according to a staff memo from Dr. David Lubarsky, the CEO of University of California, Davis, Health. But the CDC did not test for the virus until four days later, despite a request from the hospital, the memo says.
. . . Late Thursday, the CDC said a preliminary review indicated it had not been informed of the case until Feb. 23, when it requested specimens for testing.
So there's a little politics going on here. UC Davis is saying they requested a test, but was initially turned down. The CDC is saying they weren't informed until Feb 23rd (four days later) and then did the tests. Note that testing started on Sunday, Feb 23rd, and the findings were announced on Wednesday, Feb 26th. So confirming a case takes 3 or 4 days.
It should be noted that this person was transferred from one hospital to another. I wonder if the other hospital took proper protective measures. I suspect individuals from that hospital will test positive.
Anyways, I think this time line connects the dots for why Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said on Tuesday: "We expect we will see community spread in this country." They knew what was going on at UC Davis. They weren't positive it was the coronavirus, but this was definitely a cover one's ass move. How stupid would the CDC have looked if they said nothing on Tuesday and then on Wednesday the announcement is made about this individual even though they'd started tests on Sunday (Feb 23rd).
Since this individual got the virus from an unknown source, I think one can assume that the person who passed on this virus has also passed on the virus to a number of other individuals. And this individual probably passed it on to others before going to the hospital. Could there already be 25 - 50 cases connected to this individual?
No comments:
Post a Comment