4 ms·

Folks, it's the flu. We don't have a cure for the flu either. You catch it, you feel awful, your immune system fights it, after a few days the virus runs its co

Folks, it's the flu. We don't have a cure for the flu either. You catch it, you feel awful, your immune system fights it, after a few days the virus runs its course, and then you're fine again. The people who are die from the flu are some combination of old and already infirmed. Same as coronavirus. And every year something like 10-15k people die from the flu but we manage to keep our cool. The disconnect here is really wide. I'm not worried about the coronavirus, I'm worried about all the alarmism and the overreaction it might cause.

samvher 7y ago
18% of cases end up serious or critical. Out of cases with an outcome, for 8% the outcome is death. [1] It's not just the flue. I agree that there should be no overreaction and that that part might be more worrying but it's pretty serious. [1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
- bedhead 7y ago
  Agree it it serious just as the flu is serious. We don't need to create a panic and literally bring the global economy to a halt is my point. Just reading the responses I sometimes think people are cheering for pandemic.
  - MichaelApproved 7y ago
    You two are not in agreement. This isn’t just as serious as the flu, it’s more serious. More deadly and more easily transmitted. Also, people of all ages are dying.
    - icedchai 7y ago
      The death rates among people over 50 are much higher. See https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se... If you're over 50, male, have a weakened immune system, and live in a location with high population density, there may be reason to be concerned.
    - sp332 7y ago
      And we have flu vaccines.
  - karatestomp 7y ago
    There's gotta be some long German word for the state of not wishing bad things will happen, but kinda being glad when anything happens.
    - SuoDuanDao 7y ago
      I've not come across one, but 'Apokalyptenlust' is grammatically correct and describes the sentiment I think you're referring to.
- learc83 7y ago
  18% of cases, where the infected person both sought treatment and was actually tested. It is very likely that there are far more asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people out there. The 18% number is mostly useless because it's a textbook example of selection bias.
  - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
    > where the infected person both sought treatment and was successfully tested Isn't the same bias present in ILI (influenza-like illness) statistics?
    - learc83 7y ago
      We've had time to do large population studies and build models to somewhat correct for this. Most of the death rates you're seeing throw around for COVID-19 are just naive number_dead / confirmed cases.
  - samvher 7y ago
    Fair point, but WHO don't really seem to think that's the case. Dr Bruce Aylward (team lead of the WHO mission) noted that based on the large amount of disease screening that’s been done in China so far, there does not seem to be a huge number of mild cases that are going undetected. [1] [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/coronavirus-spread-in-us-not-if-but-when-and-how-severe-cdc-says/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/coronavirus-spread-i...
    - learc83 7y ago
      If you read more on that. After he said that someone else from the WHO immediately contradicted him. "The claim was quickly challenged by an infectious diseases expert who serves on a committee that advises the WHO’s health emergencies program. Gary Kobinger, director of the Infectious Disease Research Center at Laval University in Quebec, said it would be highly unusual for there not to be mild or symptom-free cases that are being missed. He pointed to the fact that outbreaks have popped up in countries far from China — including Iran and Italy — because people with mild infections were not detected and traveled to other places. 'There are mild cases that are undetected. This is why it’s spreading. Otherwise it would not be spreading because we would know where those cases are and they would be contained and that would be the end of it,' said Kobinger, who insisted that mild, undetected infections cannot be ruled out until people who haven’t been diagnosed with the illness can be tested for antibodies to the virus. 'As long as we do not have good serology data, I think that it is completely speculative to say that there are no undetected cases,' Kobinger said." What Dr. Aylward says makes no sense and reads more like a PR fluff piece designed to praise China to keep them happy, and as Kobinger points out he's probably wrong. From the same press conference he says this "If I had COVID-19, I’d want to be treated in China." Which is obviously bullshit.
- safog 7y ago
  There's several issues here though: 1. For most people symptoms are so minor that they don't go to the hospital at all and don't get counted in the reporting stats. This means that the 18% number is higher than reality. How much higher we don't know. 2. The disease disproportionately affects older people: If you're between 0-50 your chances of dying are ~0.2%. From what I can tell these mortality odds are better than if you have the regular flu. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se...
vsareto 7y ago
You're ignoring the long incubation + contagious + lack of symptoms period.
ashleyn 7y ago
Apple reported supply chain disruptions. If the government overreacts to a virus and disrupts supply chains over it, that's still a material impact on the market independent of the actual severity of the virus.
usaar333 7y ago
It's basically a version of flu that happens to be both 20x as deadly and more transmittable!
- learc83 7y ago
  We have no idea if it's 20x as deadly as the flu because we have no idea how many asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic cases are out there where no one sought treatment. The mortality numbers are an extreme case of selection bias. We also have no idea if it's more transmissible than seasonal flu -- https://sph.umich.edu/pursuit/2020posts/how-scientists-quantify-outbreaks.html https://sph.umich.edu/pursuit/2020posts/how-scientists-quant...
  - rossdavidh 7y ago
    "We are not certain" is not equal to "we have no idea". It has killed a lot more people in China than a normal flu, which often also starts in China. It has killed more people than either H1N1 or SARS did at this point in their first year. That doesn't mean it's the apocalypse, but it's not quite "we have no idea". We have some idea. It's a bad one, at least. Also, "the flu" covers a lot of ground, mortality-wise, as the history of 1918-1919 should remind us. Even in nations like Spain that were not in WW1, the flu of that season was a major deal, and if coronavirus turns out to be that bad (still an open question), it would be really, really bad.
    - learc83 7y ago
      >It has killed a lot more people in China than a normal flu No it hasn't. I can't find good numbers for China, but 80,000 died of the flu in the US in 2018 and china's population is about 4x higher. >SARS That's meaningless, SARS was contained without spreading to nearly as many people. It tells us nothing about the mortality rate, or the severity. >We have some idea. It's a bad one, at least. What I said was we have no idea if it's 20x as deadly. It's likely not 20x as deadly.
      - gnulinux 7y ago
estro 7y ago
A flu with 20x reported mortality rate caused by a virus with a significantly higher infectivity than influenza virus is something you should be worried about. Note: data is from current cases, may vary as more data is accumulated.
ceejayoz 7y ago
Also "just the flu": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

samvher 7y ago

18% of cases end up serious or critical. Out of cases with an outcome, for 8% the outcome is death. [1] It's not just the flue. I agree that there should be no overreaction and that that part might be more worrying but it's pretty serious. [1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

bedhead 7y ago
Agree it it serious just as the flu is serious. We don't need to create a panic and literally bring the global economy to a halt is my point. Just reading the responses I sometimes think people are cheering for pandemic.
- MichaelApproved 7y ago
  You two are not in agreement. This isn’t just as serious as the flu, it’s more serious. More deadly and more easily transmitted. Also, people of all ages are dying.
  - icedchai 7y ago
    The death rates among people over 50 are much higher. See https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se... If you're over 50, male, have a weakened immune system, and live in a location with high population density, there may be reason to be concerned.
  - sp332 7y ago
    And we have flu vaccines.
- karatestomp 7y ago
  There's gotta be some long German word for the state of not wishing bad things will happen, but kinda being glad when anything happens.
  - SuoDuanDao 7y ago
    I've not come across one, but 'Apokalyptenlust' is grammatically correct and describes the sentiment I think you're referring to.
learc83 7y ago
18% of cases, where the infected person both sought treatment and was actually tested. It is very likely that there are far more asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people out there. The 18% number is mostly useless because it's a textbook example of selection bias.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago
  > where the infected person both sought treatment and was successfully tested Isn't the same bias present in ILI (influenza-like illness) statistics?
  - learc83 7y ago
    We've had time to do large population studies and build models to somewhat correct for this. Most of the death rates you're seeing throw around for COVID-19 are just naive number_dead / confirmed cases.
- samvher 7y ago
  Fair point, but WHO don't really seem to think that's the case. Dr Bruce Aylward (team lead of the WHO mission) noted that based on the large amount of disease screening that’s been done in China so far, there does not seem to be a huge number of mild cases that are going undetected. [1] [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/coronavirus-spread-in-us-not-if-but-when-and-how-severe-cdc-says/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/coronavirus-spread-i...
  - learc83 7y ago
    If you read more on that. After he said that someone else from the WHO immediately contradicted him. "The claim was quickly challenged by an infectious diseases expert who serves on a committee that advises the WHO’s health emergencies program. Gary Kobinger, director of the Infectious Disease Research Center at Laval University in Quebec, said it would be highly unusual for there not to be mild or symptom-free cases that are being missed. He pointed to the fact that outbreaks have popped up in countries far from China — including Iran and Italy — because people with mild infections were not detected and traveled to other places. 'There are mild cases that are undetected. This is why it’s spreading. Otherwise it would not be spreading because we would know where those cases are and they would be contained and that would be the end of it,' said Kobinger, who insisted that mild, undetected infections cannot be ruled out until people who haven’t been diagnosed with the illness can be tested for antibodies to the virus. 'As long as we do not have good serology data, I think that it is completely speculative to say that there are no undetected cases,' Kobinger said." What Dr. Aylward says makes no sense and reads more like a PR fluff piece designed to praise China to keep them happy, and as Kobinger points out he's probably wrong. From the same press conference he says this "If I had COVID-19, I’d want to be treated in China." Which is obviously bullshit.
safog 7y ago
There's several issues here though: 1. For most people symptoms are so minor that they don't go to the hospital at all and don't get counted in the reporting stats. This means that the 18% number is higher than reality. How much higher we don't know. 2. The disease disproportionately affects older people: If you're between 0-50 your chances of dying are ~0.2%. From what I can tell these mortality odds are better than if you have the regular flu. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se...

vsareto 7y ago

You're ignoring the long incubation + contagious + lack of symptoms period.

ashleyn 7y ago

Apple reported supply chain disruptions. If the government overreacts to a virus and disrupts supply chains over it, that's still a material impact on the market independent of the actual severity of the virus.

usaar333 7y ago

It's basically a version of flu that happens to be both 20x as deadly and more transmittable!

learc83 7y ago
We have no idea if it's 20x as deadly as the flu because we have no idea how many asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic cases are out there where no one sought treatment. The mortality numbers are an extreme case of selection bias. We also have no idea if it's more transmissible than seasonal flu -- https://sph.umich.edu/pursuit/2020posts/how-scientists-quantify-outbreaks.html https://sph.umich.edu/pursuit/2020posts/how-scientists-quant...
- rossdavidh 7y ago
  "We are not certain" is not equal to "we have no idea". It has killed a lot more people in China than a normal flu, which often also starts in China. It has killed more people than either H1N1 or SARS did at this point in their first year. That doesn't mean it's the apocalypse, but it's not quite "we have no idea". We have some idea. It's a bad one, at least. Also, "the flu" covers a lot of ground, mortality-wise, as the history of 1918-1919 should remind us. Even in nations like Spain that were not in WW1, the flu of that season was a major deal, and if coronavirus turns out to be that bad (still an open question), it would be really, really bad.
  - learc83 7y ago
    >It has killed a lot more people in China than a normal flu No it hasn't. I can't find good numbers for China, but 80,000 died of the flu in the US in 2018 and china's population is about 4x higher. >SARS That's meaningless, SARS was contained without spreading to nearly as many people. It tells us nothing about the mortality rate, or the severity. >We have some idea. It's a bad one, at least. What I said was we have no idea if it's 20x as deadly. It's likely not 20x as deadly.
    - gnulinux 7y ago

estro 7y ago

A flu with 20x reported mortality rate caused by a virus with a significantly higher infectivity than influenza virus is something you should be worried about. Note: data is from current cases, may vary as more data is accumulated.

ceejayoz 7y ago

Also "just the flu": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]