3 ms·

I’m not for stopping the world, but Coronavirus gets brushed off as no big deal a lot online. I feel like the big issue will be Coronavirus bogarting medical re

I’m not for stopping the world, but Coronavirus gets brushed off as no big deal a lot online. I feel like the big issue will be Coronavirus bogarting medical resources. Pneumonia in a healthy individual is treatable given proper treatment and resources, but if everyone has pneumonia, then we have a resource problem. Additionally, a lot of people care for the very young and the very old, and they’re not comforted with the sentiment, “well, if you’re healthy you’ll live,”

hef19898 7y ago
I have the opposite impression, to me it seems that the Corona virus is seen as the end of the world online.
eropple 7y ago
It gets brushed off as "not a big deal" because...right now, we don't really have a reason to think it is one. It could become one. It merits state and international attention. It does not merit panic and there is absolutely no reason to think that "everyone" will get it or will develop pneumonic symptoms from it in a way that strains medical resources in developed countries (indeed, the biggest threat is likely if it becomes a thing in less-developed countries--but it seems to be less communicable than SARS or H1N1 right now, too). It is an important issue at the levels of government and international organizations that manage things like this. But it's silly to obsess over it and it's downright immoral to shit-stir with comparisons to bubonic civilization-wrecking plague as the OP to whom I replied decided to do. And I'm going to be frank: the very young and very old could just as easily die of influenza and the people who care for the very young and very old are not, for the most part, even screening for flu shots. I have trouble mustering the emotional energy to care for their fear of the scary black swan when they're standing in a flock of white ones that are themselves dangerous.
- wolco 7y ago
  Less communicable than SARS? No, it is more because SARS was only communicable when the patient was at their worst. This can spread during all phases. The mortality is lower than SARS but much higher than the flu. To put it in real terms. If you take the number of people you ever met in your life and gave them a bad flu you might find one who dies. Compare that to taking your mother/father/brothers and immediate families and giving them corona where at least one would die. Compared to SARS where someone in your immediate family would die or ebola where either you or your wife would die.
  - pmoriarty 7y ago
    "This can spread during all phases." There is evidence that the study claiming the virus can be transmitted by people without symptoms was flawed.[1] Also, according to that article, even if asymptomatic people transmit the virus "asymptomatic transmission likely plays a minor role in the epidemic overall, WHO says. People who cough or sneeze are more likely to spread the virus, the agency wrote in a situation report on Saturday." [1] - https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomati...
- AlchemistCamp 7y ago
  >but it seems to be less communicable than SARS or H1N1 right now, too I was in this region both during SARS and now. It's very clear from your comments that you weren't really paying attention during SARS and you're misinformed now. More people have already been infected by this coronavirus than the entire cumulative SARS infections to date. There have been more deaths too, despite its relatively "low" virulence. > And I'm going to be frank: the very young and very old could just as easily die of influenza No. This is completely false. Please stop. A seasonal flu kills 2 per 100k infected and this virus kills ~2,000 per 100k infected. SARS was much more lethal but this is not a garden variety influenza and telling people it is is actively harmful.

hef19898 7y ago

I have the opposite impression, to me it seems that the Corona virus is seen as the end of the world online.

eropple 7y ago

It gets brushed off as "not a big deal" because...right now, we don't really have a reason to think it is one. It could become one. It merits state and international attention. It does not merit panic and there is absolutely no reason to think that "everyone" will get it or will develop pneumonic symptoms from it in a way that strains medical resources in developed countries (indeed, the biggest threat is likely if it becomes a thing in less-developed countries--but it seems to be less communicable than SARS or H1N1 right now, too). It is an important issue at the levels of government and international organizations that manage things like this. But it's silly to obsess over it and it's downright immoral to shit-stir with comparisons to bubonic civilization-wrecking plague as the OP to whom I replied decided to do. And I'm going to be frank: the very young and very old could just as easily die of influenza and the people who care for the very young and very old are not, for the most part, even screening for flu shots. I have trouble mustering the emotional energy to care for their fear of the scary black swan when they're standing in a flock of white ones that are themselves dangerous.

wolco 7y ago
Less communicable than SARS? No, it is more because SARS was only communicable when the patient was at their worst. This can spread during all phases. The mortality is lower than SARS but much higher than the flu. To put it in real terms. If you take the number of people you ever met in your life and gave them a bad flu you might find one who dies. Compare that to taking your mother/father/brothers and immediate families and giving them corona where at least one would die. Compared to SARS where someone in your immediate family would die or ebola where either you or your wife would die.
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  "This can spread during all phases." There is evidence that the study claiming the virus can be transmitted by people without symptoms was flawed.[1] Also, according to that article, even if asymptomatic people transmit the virus "asymptomatic transmission likely plays a minor role in the epidemic overall, WHO says. People who cough or sneeze are more likely to spread the virus, the agency wrote in a situation report on Saturday." [1] - https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomati...
AlchemistCamp 7y ago
>but it seems to be less communicable than SARS or H1N1 right now, too I was in this region both during SARS and now. It's very clear from your comments that you weren't really paying attention during SARS and you're misinformed now. More people have already been infected by this coronavirus than the entire cumulative SARS infections to date. There have been more deaths too, despite its relatively "low" virulence. > And I'm going to be frank: the very young and very old could just as easily die of influenza No. This is completely false. Please stop. A seasonal flu kills 2 per 100k infected and this virus kills ~2,000 per 100k infected. SARS was much more lethal but this is not a garden variety influenza and telling people it is is actively harmful.