I've noticed a trend in the discussion of Covid-19 when talking to people. They tend to either under estimate it; "it's just the flu", or they over estimate it; "This is going to be really bad, time to buy all toilet paper".
There's a lot of confusing mixed messages, not even from just random people, but from the WHO and different governments. They say they are fully prepared and it can be contained yet doctors and health advisors are saying that's just not true. I think there's a bit of play here between the negative effects from the virus, versus the perceived negative effects from panic (I suspect the economy plays a role in government's responses far more than people think).
So to me it seems there is a bit of a management or reaction to an over reaction. Yet, in face of a pandemic, being worried is probably sensible because it will lead you prepare and be conscious of good hygiene practises. Telling people everything is okay in the face of possible emergency or possible disaster is not good.
Are there people out there over reacting and over reaching with their analysis of this? Sure. But that doesn't mean there's nothing worth reacting over. This is a serious health issue, and calling it 'just the flu' could be considered reckless in my opinion.
The worry and panic can be viewed as the social mass fever. Possibly a dangerous symptom if it gets out of hand, but actually a strategy to fight the virus.
IMO part of this is that at every step there are a number of scenarios that could occur (from "bad flu" to "1918 all over again"). As we get more information and see this unfold, we can update our scenarios based on new information. However, I haven't seen too much reporting that lays it out in this way.
This leads to some people drawing conclusions like "wow I was lied to, they said it wasn't bad and would be contained to China," which isn't entirely true.
Doubling rate in confirmed cases is closer to 4 days than 3 unless you include only the last week or so. A doubling rate of 6 days in the medium term has also been estimated. This will obviously delay the time to reach one million cases. However, confirmed cases are a lower bound for the total number of cases, as cases only get confirmed when evaluated by healthcare personnel. It is not credible that Iran and Italy have 3000 cases each, when lots of tourists returning from there have been diagnosed. Did they just randomly bump into one of the 3000 in a country of millions?
Uncertainties aside, the model of exponential growth is sound. Disease spread follows exponential growth until it hits an inflection point, either due to running out of viable hosts or due to quarantines and other countermeasures reducing the transmission rate per infected below 1. China forcibly caused this inflection on February 4th, by essentially stopping their economy through strict quarantines.
A doubling rate of 4 days yields 1 million infected globally on the 29th of March, and that's what we'll get unless the transmission rate somehow falls before then. Plenty of assumptions in that statement though.
I honestly have no idea! Can you link to his analysis, I haven't seen it.
Regardless, I'm no expert on this matter, and it would be nice if people stated this more often than defer to which ever thing they heard as being correct, which I think is what people are doing when they say it's 'just a flu'.
Ideally we should prepare for the worst of possible outcomes, hope for the best of possible outcomes, and expect the actual outcome to be in the middle. Those possible outcomes change as more information gets released.
There’s also a lot of politics involved. Fox News pundits are insisting the escalating seriousness of the coverage is a plot to make Trump look bad, and shouting about how influenza kills way more people, and it’s no big deal.
It's amusing because when Trump instituted the travel ban early, it was Fox which was playing up the threat and all other news channels which were playing it down. Then a month later, they switched positions. This nonsense is why we have international organizations like the WHO, which are made of actual experts rather than pundits.
There's a lot of confusing mixed messages, not even from just random people, but from the WHO and different governments. They say they are fully prepared and it can be contained yet doctors and health advisors are saying that's just not true. I think there's a bit of play here between the negative effects from the virus, versus the perceived negative effects from panic (I suspect the economy plays a role in government's responses far more than people think).
So to me it seems there is a bit of a management or reaction to an over reaction. Yet, in face of a pandemic, being worried is probably sensible because it will lead you prepare and be conscious of good hygiene practises. Telling people everything is okay in the face of possible emergency or possible disaster is not good.
Are there people out there over reacting and over reaching with their analysis of this? Sure. But that doesn't mean there's nothing worth reacting over. This is a serious health issue, and calling it 'just the flu' could be considered reckless in my opinion.