Burst of COVID-19 cases was centered in Anchorage care facility - Must Read Alaska
Connect with:
Sunday, July 12, 2020
HomeThe 907Burst of COVID-19 cases was centered in Anchorage care facility

Burst of COVID-19 cases was centered in Anchorage care facility

An extended care nursing facility in Anchorage is the epicenter of a burst of COVID-19 cases in Anchorage. 12 of the 27 cases in the past 24 hours were found at the Providence Transitional Care Center in Anchorage. of the 12 cases, the majority were in residents but some were in care givers.

A resident of the center tested positive on May 29. After that became known, an outdoor testing site was set up and a large number of tests were conducted. The facility has been closed to visitors since late March.

The details were made public at a press conference this afternoon with Gov. Mike Dunleavy.

Donations Welcome

Share

Written by

Suzanne Downing had careers in business and journalism before serving as the Director of Faith and Community-based Initiatives for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and returning to Alaska to serve as speechwriter for Gov. Sean Parnell. Born on the Oregon coast, she moved to Alaska in 1969.

Latest comments

  • So…even the medical folks can’t get their shit together.
    Is it big money talking?

  • Proper protocols must be adhered to. “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”.

    1. Proper garb, masks KN 95 should be used, or flat masks should be utilized by staff a in order to ensure that the transfer of the virus is reduced.

    The Health inspector should evevuuates.

  • Fifteen of the new cases were apparently NOT associated with long term care facilities. That is disturbing. The “experts” in public heath and epidemiology seem to be enjoying their new authority and like to lecture others on what is allowed and what is to be shamed. Yet, what is becoming more obvious is that, more broadly, the medical community knows very little about this disease and not much about how to stop it. Letting experts exercise power over others is appropriate when those experts can show that their expertise can improve things. When those same experts cannot show results, the claim to power dissolves. Twenty seven new cases is not progress, regardless of who is counting.

    • The reason there were 27 new cases is precisely related to lessened government intervention. You claim the experts don’t know “much about how to stop it.” But just because you say it, does not make it true. In fact, it is very clear how to contain this virus: the more social distancing is implemented, the lower the spread of the virus. That part is really simple, and I am frankly surprised that it eludes you. The complicated part is balancing the negative effects of social distancing with the negative effects of not social distancing. When you get to that question, it becomes more a question of opinion and less of fact, because it is so complicated. But let’s quit spreading lies that indicate that we don’t know how to control spread of the virus.

      • There were 27 new cases because officials set up a large testing facility in a place with a known viral presence.
        Actually, the scientific jury is still out regarding whether social distancing is effective in solving this virus problem. This is especially true in terms of preventing deaths. In fact the states with longer lockdowns had worse results: by the middle of May, Kyle Lamb had posted a solid analysis on Twitter, grouping states by how long they implemented a lockdown and averaging the deaths per 100,000 people by each grouping. The results are astounding, as there is a perfectly inverse relationship between how long a state implemented a lockdown and how successful it was in keeping the deaths down. The states with few or no lockdown measures have the lowest fatality rates, in fact dramatically so.
        As far as completely “stopping the spread of the virus,” many intelligent people believe that should not actually be our goal, as it suppresses the development of herd immunity that will protect those vulnerable. At the numbers we’re seeing, it is apparent that this particular virus is already endemic, so trying to “eliminate” it is as pointless as trying to eliminate the common cold (which is frequently caused by other coronaviruses, by the way).

      • Given that a large portion of the ENTIRE scientific apparatus of the world has been focused on COVID 19 since February, I will stand by my view that we still do not know much about this virus. I will agree that if we isolate EVERY human being from EVERY OTHER human being for an extended period of time transmission will stop. I will let you make that argument and I wish you luck. I am not impressed with “the science” so far. As with many, my interest in being compliant is waning.

        • Maybe you misunderstood my comment. I did not say we should isolate people, in fact just the opposite. I am saying that compliance with lockdowns and mask mandates is pointless in regard to “controlling” the virus, and actually is harmful in other ways. I also agree with you that the mainstream scientific community has squandered their credibility (long ago, actually).

          • I was responding to Mr. Ryan. I do not disagree with your comments.

  • No. It is a virus that doesn’t discriminate.

  • With expanded testing you’ll find more cases. If you set up a large testing facility in a place where a contagious virus has been found, of course you will find more. And since masks have been shown to be relatively ineffective at preventing viral respiratory infections even in clinical settings (based on studies conducted well before this was so thoroughly politicized), it would defy reason if there were NOT more cases in the care facility. The same goes for the scattering of other new cases in the state.
    But the number of cases should not be the main consideration here, since the virus causes mild or no symptoms in a huge majority of people who contract it; in fact those people are key in the progress toward herd immunity. Hospitalizations and deaths are what we need to be looking at, and those remain extremely low and completely manageable, in Alaska and across the country.
    In spite of what our rulers say, there is NO solid science behind mask-wearing by the general public, especially cloth masks. In fact cloth masks were found to actually INCREASE viral infection rates in a large randomized study in 2015, conducted in a clinical setting where medical workers presumably know more about proper mask usage than the general public. And there are a number of other significant negative effects known to result from the use of face masks.
    If you actually do want to “follow the science,” see any of the following:
    Larson EL, Liverman CT, editors. Preventing transmission of pandemic influenza and other viral respiratory diseases: personal protective equipment for healthcare workers: update 2010. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2010.
    [2] Oberg T, Brosseau LM. “Surgical mask filter and fit performance.” Am J Infect Control 2008 May;36(4):276-282
    [3] MacIntyre CR, Cauchemez S, Dwyer DE et al. “Face mask use and control of respiratory virus transmission in households.” Emerg Infect Dis 2009 Feb;15(2):233-241
    [4] Cowling BJ, Chan KH, Fang VJ et al. “Facemasks and hand hygiene to prevent influenza transmission in households: a cluster randomized trial.” Ann Intern Med 2009 Oct;15(7):437-446
    [5] Laguipo ABB. “Wearing masks may increase your risk of coronavirus infection, expert says.” News Medical Life Sciences Mar 15 2020
    [6] Bin-Reza F, Chavarrias VL, Vicoll A, Chamberland ME. “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence.” Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2012 Jul;6(4):257-267
    [7] MccIntyre CR, Seale H, Dung TC et al. “A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.” BMJ Open 2015 Mar;5:e006577
    [8] Bae S, Kim MC, Kim JY et al. “Effectiveness of Surgical and Cotton Masks in Blocking SARS-CoV-2: A Controlled Comparison in 4 Patients.” Ann Intern Med 2020 Apr; DOI: 10.7326/M20-134
    [9] Robert Gearty “NJ police say ‘excessive wearing’ of coronavirus mas contributed to driver passing out, crashing car.” Fox News April 25 2020
    [10] Martiromo M. Maskme: Suffering from acne or breakouts under your mask? Here’s what to do.” Fox News May 26 2020
    [11] Lim ECH, Seet RCS, Lee K-H, Wilder-Smith EPV, Chuah BYS, Ong BKC. “Headaches and the N95 Face-Mask Amongst Healthcare Providers.” Acta Neurol Scand 2006 Mar;113(3):199-202

    • We are going to have more cases but the numbers are manageable and no more than the number of people that get the “typical” flu virus every year. In fact, statistics show that for the last flu season beginning 2019 and ending January 25, 2020, there were 19 million cases of influenza in the United States. In Alaska over a period of two weeks in November 2019 there were 382 new cases of influenza. The number of cases in Alaska with the COVID virus are extremely low and the fact that there were a higher number of cases reported in one day doesn’t mean the system isn’t working. We have a high rate of people who have recovered from the virus and only a small number (around 10) that are currently hospitalized for it. The places with the highest number of deaths have unfortunately been in nursing homes or assisted living facilities. Those places are high risk at best and contain people with multiple underlying health concerns and contagions. Overall the state is doing well and I believe that the majority of us all know that we should not be going out when sick, that we should cover our nose and mouths when coughing or sneezing, and that it is up to each of us to decide what is right for us and our loved ones. Having said that I applaud Governor Dunleavy on his opening up of the state and travel. It is time for Alaskans to get back to doing what we do best, living life.

  • MD, well put.

    Thank you.

%d bloggers like this: