5 ms·

Isn’t Caixin Global a Chinese news source, almost certainly filtered? Do you have a reason to believe them more than the dark corners?

user5994461 7y ago
The WHO also announced 5-6 days average incubation with a mortality rate around 3%.
- allovernow 7y ago
  The WHO has been reporting numbers almost identical to those out of China, which are unquestionably and severely underreported and can only represent a distant lower bound. I don't think anything coming from the WHO can be trusted. I honestly think it hugely irresponsible for the WHO to report these numbers without clear disclaimers. In fact, there are clear politics at play here, as the WHO has only come out with massive praise for China's response, making no mention of the CCP's clear attempt to keep knowledge of the virus from spreading and the silencing of activists and the medical community at large by charging them with spreading false rumors. If China had taken proactive measures months ago instead of initiating a campaign of suppression things would be different now.
  - tristanj 7y ago
    I believe it goes further than this. WHO and China are both trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic because they know if they publish more accurate estimates, it will cause mass panic. Panic is not helpful in any situation, and leads to an unstable society, hoarding, and destructive behaviors.
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      > WHO and China are both trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic because they know if they publish more accurate estimates, it will cause mass panic. Transparently dishonest minimization itself risks causing panic.
    - hef19898 7y ago
      And what makes you believe that to be true? Have any WHO numbers been proven wrong in the past for, say, ebola? SARS? Or any other epidemic or disease? Or is it because it is China that a lots of people prefer to not believe them? Because that is how you spread panic if you ask me.
      - allovernow 7y ago
        > Or is it because it is China that a lots of people prefer to not believe them? Jesus man this is a modern day authoritarian regime with a fully digitized social credit score and reeducation camps for dissidents. Yes, it is perfectly rational not to trust what Chinese people are saying. I can't believe how thoroughly the notion of culture has been wiped from the American psyche. People on average think and act differently in other countries, and sometimes those differences are negative.
        hef19898 7y ago
        And you really do believe with all that international scrutiny China would get away with reporting false numbers? Come on. Also don't know what to make of your last sentence. Cultural differences being negative? What are you talking about?
        allovernow 7y ago
        The grasp of the party pervades Chinese culture - particularly because their communications are monitored. China is effectively a black box. They so tightly control information that there is little the international community can gain from scrutiny. You are underestimating the awesome power of a modern orewellian surveillance state, and party loyalty had been forced into the culture of the average person. They will put their country first, and that includes maintaining that nothing severe is going on in their Homeland while they are abroad. Try asking any recent Chinese immigrants/visa workers you know, and you'll see how they tell you everything is fine. Just be aware you're putting them on the spot. Gulags are a powerful motivator.
      - tristanj 7y ago
    - user5994461 7y ago
      I'm making an interactive map showing the progression of the virus, from various sources. https://coronaprogress.com/ https://coronaprogress.com/ I don't believe anymore that they are trying to downplay it, or they are being really bad at it. We shall be approaching a hundred thousand confirmed cases within 10 days.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    AFAIK the WHO always acknowledges that there is a large number if unreported cases and truly reliable numbers are only available after the fact. They also state that during the outbreak, the longer it takes and the more cases are reported numbers trend towards the true numbers. It is rather improbable that that the death ratio for the unreported cases should be higher than for the reported ones. Unless you believe in conspiracy theories, which I think the HN crowd should be above believing.
allovernow 7y ago
You're right, and this could very well be a propaganda piece, but it somehow comes off as genuine. There are activists in China who recognize the severity, understand the grasp of the party, and still desperately attempt to reach out - including the selfless doctor who died yesterday, and a number of activists who have already been disappeared. No doubt the number of such people has been increasing exponentially and the only antidote to authoritarian control is numbers. It's plausible that enough Chinese sympathetic to dissemination of such critical information have gathered such that an article like this may be genuine. Moreover, while many terrible rumors ostensibly from educated and/or directly witnessing sources from the dregs of the web have turned out to be true, these sources are even less reliable than the CCP, given the propensity of netizens for exaggerating and/or deliberately spreading falsehoods. Which is to say reports out of China may not be that much less reliable than much of what is floating around and at this point, as ridiculous as I know it sounds, I'm almost willing to relax my suspicion and cling to slivers of hope. The undesputed facts so far are grim. 80-90% of the Chinese GDP has been shut down, we still don't know with certainty just how contagious or dangerous the virus actually is, but it is obviously more virulent than any of the previous viruses from the Corona family, and if for whatever reason containment fails for an extended period of time in a region, you can expect severe social hardship. How long can China continue to operate at 10% capacity? It is only prudent in my opinion to make at least minimal preparations now with 1-2 months of food and water before panic potentially sets in and stores are emptied. There is still a high probability that the virus will be sufficiently contained and minimally deadly, but this also is shaping up to possibly be the biggest threat faced by civilization in centuries, exceeding the Spanish Flu of the early 1900s. I'm about halfway through Gallaher's report linked in these comments (very thankful for it) and I hope I'm wrong, but even his numbers are understandably prefaced with uncertainty.
- anaanymouse 7y ago
  Thank you for this - can't find Gallaher's report, would you mind linking it again?
  - allovernow 7y ago
    http://virological.org/t/analysis-of-wuhan-coronavirus-deja-vu/357 http://virological.org/t/analysis-of-wuhan-coronavirus-deja-... I don't know who this guy is but he and his son are awesome.
DaniFong 7y ago
Even though this is true, Caixin has been allowed some leniency, especially in reporting this outbreak. Some reports have been very distinct from the official reporting, although it appears that some articles have also been retracted. In times of a crisis like this, some signal will get through.
07d046 7y ago
Caixin is the best Chinese news source in normal times, and at this time all Chinese news is more free to report on the virus. As someone very critical of the CCP, I'd say Caixin's reporting here is as authoritative as anywhere.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  > as authoritative as anywhere Specifically in the category of news media companies. There are many stories that they simply can not publish, being based out of Beijing. These stories, at best, will be published to social media by individuals in the thick of it.

user5994461 7y ago

The WHO also announced 5-6 days average incubation with a mortality rate around 3%.

allovernow 7y ago
The WHO has been reporting numbers almost identical to those out of China, which are unquestionably and severely underreported and can only represent a distant lower bound. I don't think anything coming from the WHO can be trusted. I honestly think it hugely irresponsible for the WHO to report these numbers without clear disclaimers. In fact, there are clear politics at play here, as the WHO has only come out with massive praise for China's response, making no mention of the CCP's clear attempt to keep knowledge of the virus from spreading and the silencing of activists and the medical community at large by charging them with spreading false rumors. If China had taken proactive measures months ago instead of initiating a campaign of suppression things would be different now.
- tristanj 7y ago
  I believe it goes further than this. WHO and China are both trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic because they know if they publish more accurate estimates, it will cause mass panic. Panic is not helpful in any situation, and leads to an unstable society, hoarding, and destructive behaviors.
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > WHO and China are both trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic because they know if they publish more accurate estimates, it will cause mass panic. Transparently dishonest minimization itself risks causing panic.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    And what makes you believe that to be true? Have any WHO numbers been proven wrong in the past for, say, ebola? SARS? Or any other epidemic or disease? Or is it because it is China that a lots of people prefer to not believe them? Because that is how you spread panic if you ask me.
    - allovernow 7y ago
      > Or is it because it is China that a lots of people prefer to not believe them? Jesus man this is a modern day authoritarian regime with a fully digitized social credit score and reeducation camps for dissidents. Yes, it is perfectly rational not to trust what Chinese people are saying. I can't believe how thoroughly the notion of culture has been wiped from the American psyche. People on average think and act differently in other countries, and sometimes those differences are negative.
      - hef19898 7y ago
        And you really do believe with all that international scrutiny China would get away with reporting false numbers? Come on. Also don't know what to make of your last sentence. Cultural differences being negative? What are you talking about?
        allovernow 7y ago
        The grasp of the party pervades Chinese culture - particularly because their communications are monitored. China is effectively a black box. They so tightly control information that there is little the international community can gain from scrutiny. You are underestimating the awesome power of a modern orewellian surveillance state, and party loyalty had been forced into the culture of the average person. They will put their country first, and that includes maintaining that nothing severe is going on in their Homeland while they are abroad. Try asking any recent Chinese immigrants/visa workers you know, and you'll see how they tell you everything is fine. Just be aware you're putting them on the spot. Gulags are a powerful motivator.
    - tristanj 7y ago
  - user5994461 7y ago
    I'm making an interactive map showing the progression of the virus, from various sources. https://coronaprogress.com/ https://coronaprogress.com/ I don't believe anymore that they are trying to downplay it, or they are being really bad at it. We shall be approaching a hundred thousand confirmed cases within 10 days.
- hef19898 7y ago
  AFAIK the WHO always acknowledges that there is a large number if unreported cases and truly reliable numbers are only available after the fact. They also state that during the outbreak, the longer it takes and the more cases are reported numbers trend towards the true numbers. It is rather improbable that that the death ratio for the unreported cases should be higher than for the reported ones. Unless you believe in conspiracy theories, which I think the HN crowd should be above believing.

allovernow 7y ago

You're right, and this could very well be a propaganda piece, but it somehow comes off as genuine. There are activists in China who recognize the severity, understand the grasp of the party, and still desperately attempt to reach out - including the selfless doctor who died yesterday, and a number of activists who have already been disappeared. No doubt the number of such people has been increasing exponentially and the only antidote to authoritarian control is numbers. It's plausible that enough Chinese sympathetic to dissemination of such critical information have gathered such that an article like this may be genuine. Moreover, while many terrible rumors ostensibly from educated and/or directly witnessing sources from the dregs of the web have turned out to be true, these sources are even less reliable than the CCP, given the propensity of netizens for exaggerating and/or deliberately spreading falsehoods. Which is to say reports out of China may not be that much less reliable than much of what is floating around and at this point, as ridiculous as I know it sounds, I'm almost willing to relax my suspicion and cling to slivers of hope. The undesputed facts so far are grim. 80-90% of the Chinese GDP has been shut down, we still don't know with certainty just how contagious or dangerous the virus actually is, but it is obviously more virulent than any of the previous viruses from the Corona family, and if for whatever reason containment fails for an extended period of time in a region, you can expect severe social hardship. How long can China continue to operate at 10% capacity? It is only prudent in my opinion to make at least minimal preparations now with 1-2 months of food and water before panic potentially sets in and stores are emptied. There is still a high probability that the virus will be sufficiently contained and minimally deadly, but this also is shaping up to possibly be the biggest threat faced by civilization in centuries, exceeding the Spanish Flu of the early 1900s. I'm about halfway through Gallaher's report linked in these comments (very thankful for it) and I hope I'm wrong, but even his numbers are understandably prefaced with uncertainty.

anaanymouse 7y ago
Thank you for this - can't find Gallaher's report, would you mind linking it again?
- allovernow 7y ago
  http://virological.org/t/analysis-of-wuhan-coronavirus-deja-vu/357 http://virological.org/t/analysis-of-wuhan-coronavirus-deja-... I don't know who this guy is but he and his son are awesome.

DaniFong 7y ago

Even though this is true, Caixin has been allowed some leniency, especially in reporting this outbreak. Some reports have been very distinct from the official reporting, although it appears that some articles have also been retracted. In times of a crisis like this, some signal will get through.

07d046 7y ago

Caixin is the best Chinese news source in normal times, and at this time all Chinese news is more free to report on the virus. As someone very critical of the CCP, I'd say Caixin's reporting here is as authoritative as anywhere.

microcolonel 7y ago
> as authoritative as anywhere Specifically in the category of news media companies. There are many stories that they simply can not publish, being based out of Beijing. These stories, at best, will be published to social media by individuals in the thick of it.