8 ms·
I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad
- jbverschoor 7y agoAnd I had the flu.. it nearly killed me. Can we please stop this nonsense
- goatherders 7y agowhat nonsense?
- ptx 7y agoDownplaying the seriousness of the pandemic. First there was nothing to worry about because it was localized to Wuhan, then there was nothing to worry about because it was only spreading in China and surely would not spread to $YOUR_COUNTRY, then there was nothing to worry about because it was only a few isolated cases that were easily dealt with, and now we seem to be moving into how there's nothing to worry about because, even though the containment has completely failed and it's conceivable that most people in most countries will be infected, you still have a pretty good chance of surviving the infection.
- sjg007 7y agoI think it is already here and we just don't have a real view into it because of limited testing. The community transmissions that keep popping up are indications of that. I expect we will see an exponential increase in those in the next few weeks.
- bart_spoon 7y agoNo one is downplaying anything. If anything, people are overemphasizing the danger. Even in Wuhan, the center of the outbreak, less than half a percent of the population has contracted this thing, and of that half percent, 4 out of 5 have mild symptoms. And the outbreak there seems to be stabilizing. That isn’t to say it isn’t serious, or that we shouldn’t be taking measures to guard against it. But a large contingent of people are acting as if it’s the Walking Dead outside, and the apocalypse is just around the corner. But irrationally overblown fear and misinformation is just as likely to result in suffering and loss of life as the disease right now. An increase of unemployment of 1% is estimated to result in anywhere from 1500-40000 deaths in the US, and vague fears over this disease have been driving some of the biggest free falls in the market in decades. Part of an appropriate response to something like this means not overreacting just as much as it means not undereacting.
- goatherders 7y agoExcellent comment. The rush on supplies and goods means that people in need may not have access to care. THAT worries me quite a bit more than the disease itself.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- tyfon 7y agoI think after the success of the media in respect to this virus (massive amounts of clicks and TV view time), I firmly believe that every new flu will have it's own name and similar coverage from now on. They just made too much money off this, fear is a big seller.
- nkozyra 7y agoEven if one was this cynical, do you not think a novel (not influenza) virus with an unusually high mortality rate spreading internationally is worthy of news coverage? The media didn't name this thing, nor SARS, nor avian bird flu.
- tyfon 7y agoSARS (the syndrome) is actually caused by the corona virus so it's not really new. But I see my karma won't be healthy in this discussion so I guess I'll shut up :p
- 40four 7y agoIt is worthy of coverage, but it’s only interesting because it’s new. It really not the super virus they make it out to be. The news coverage does not paint a realistic picture. The height mortality rate is mostly due to the novelty and the fact we haven’t developed drugs for it yet. Also, it is killing almost exclusively elderly people. People who don’t have fully functioning immune systems. I’m willing to be the common flu killed a similar percentage of elderly before we developed a vaccine for it. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se... This is not the message the news tells us though. They would have us believe it is some unstoppable virus, killing anyone who comes in contact with it. But there really isn’t any evidence to back it up. Fear mongering certainly does drive traffic.
- zenmaster10665 7y agoThe flu is a pretty well known illness at this point. This is a serious issue as it has a higher mortality rate than the flu, is spreading quickly and has the potential to evolve into a strain with a much higher mortality rate. I agree people shouldn't panic, but I don't agree this is just something to be dismissed... The pandemic of 1918 has some lessons to be learned here. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-1918-virus.html https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-19...
- oefrha 7y agoThose who died from the virus aren’t writing in to tell us it’s very bad, so there’s that. Edit: To be clear, I’m not being dismissive of this patient’s experience; just want to point out the element of survivorship bias.
- 40four 7y agoI think this mans perspective is important. For the vast majority of people who get this it isn’t much different then having a cold or the flu. The large majority of people this is killing are elderly, whose immune systems are less likely to successfully defend. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se... But that is not the picture painted by media day in and day out. There is so much hype and sensationalism with this story. They would have us believe it’s the zombie apocalypse out there, and I just don’t think that is the reality.
- adnzzzzZ 7y agoThe media mostly ignored this story for 1 entire month despite its constant seriousness and despite it being clear that it was the biggest event of the year so far. Only this last week has it picked up on it. For people who have been following it from the start that fact was used as evidence that it was an actually serious problem given that the media was constantly downplaying it or just ignoring it. In regards to the disease's lethality, even though most people will experience it as just a flu, between 10% to 15% of people experience it bad enough that they need hospital beds. If there's a generalized outbreak in the population like there was in China hospitals will be overloaded and general chaos will ensue, because hospitals in most countries aren't ready to deal with this kind of surge.
- bart_spoon 7y agoThe media has been reporting on every detail of the coronavirus for over a month now. If you have only just started noticing, that is your fault. No one is ignoring anything.
- 7y ago
- ducttape12 7y agoI suppose any disease isn't that bad when you have round the clock medical care pumping you full of medicine.
- goatherders 7y agoNo, in fact lots of diseases are incredibly bad even with round the clock medical care pumping you full of medicine.
- onetimemanytime 7y agoSure but you can bet that CDC is caring for those few that are infected. Meaning among the best doctors in the world so it's very unlikely that he will die for inadequate care. What will happen in a third world country? Or in the USA if million and millions are infected, overwhelming the health care system?
- numpad0 7y agoWell there are plenty of painful diseases without a cure or effective pain mitigation short of euthanasia.
- cm2012 7y agoThat's why it's so dangerous. For 80% of people it's a mild cold. - so they go to work like normal.
- jacobolus 7y ago80% don’t require hospitalization, but a significant fraction of those still involve pneumonia (not to mention high fever, muscle soreness, etc.).
- mrspeaker 7y agoThis is a time where it would be preferable to live somewhere that has good free/cheap health and social systems: if you're sick, you stay home and there are limited social or financial repercussions. So many people where I am will just "soldier on" because they have no choice.
- 101404 7y agoWhat do you mean by "social repercussions"?
- Ill_ban_myself 7y agoMany people at offices in the US look at taking sick time as lazy and bosses will pressure you to come in anyway
- 101404 7y agoYou mean, normal employees? That's weird. And the "bosses" seem especially dumb. If one person is sick and contagious, you risk to get your entire team sick and then have to shut down operations.
- war1025 7y agoThere's a difference between going to work when you're sick because "you have to" and going to work when you're sick because "you feel mostly fine". This is a virus that in it's milder forms generally just causes a cold. I've never stayed home from anything because of a cold. Colds are just a fact of life. I imagine a lot of people feel similarly.
- robin_reala 7y agoThe Guardian today have another story titled “To hell and back”: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/29/to-hell-and-back-my-three-weeks-suffering-from-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/29/to-hell-and-ba...
- infinity0 7y agoThat's why it's important to have positive stories like this one, the media is only focusing on the negative ones even though they only count for < 1% of the real situations.
- obmelvin 7y agoThe death rate is 2-2.5% so how do you suggest that the negative cases are <1%?? At least every death is a 'negative story' and something tells me you don't want ARDS or secondary infection, so that's probably negative too.
- hef19898 7y agoYeah, and a couple of days ago LinkedIn got spammed by "Supply Chains will die" posts. Well, at least my feed. So yeah, a hell of a load of clickbait all over the place. And only minority is trying to calm things down.
- throwaway122378 7y agoFear is better click bait
- me551ah 7y agoBut to dismiss all fearful articles as clickbait is erroneous.
- _jack_cox 7y agoFrom this story sounds like a moderate flu. Fever, coughing, body aches, and congestion. It does seem like the media is click-baiting the world for profit.
- chewz 7y agoAnd it wouldn't be so bad for me either. But I am taking care of my 88yo Mom and for her it might be lethal.
- sonicxxg 7y agoNot to sound insensitive, but at 88y, pretty much living becomes letal.
- hdjejdjd 7y agoYou're an asshole.
- Medicalidiot 7y agoThis is dangerous. Take every precaution you can not to get infected for as long as you can and that you don't infect anyone else. This is not the flu. The flu makes you more susceptible to a material pneumonia and that's how it kills. SARS-CoV-2 is NOT the flu. COVID-19 is the disease, by the way. Here is the list of complications: -ARDS in 29% (Acute respiratory distress disease, this needs mechanical ventilation to survive) -acute cardiac injury in 12% (this potentially kills your heart tissue which leads to arrhythmia and then a heart attack) -secondary infection in 10% https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31986264-clinical-features-of-patients-infected-with-2019-novel-coronavirus-in-wuhan-china/?dopt=Abstract https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31986264-clinical-features-o... This is something you should be very mindful of. A Cavalier attitude can get you or people you care about killed. Here's the current list of symptoms to know if you're infected with SARS-CoV-2: fever in 98.6% fatigue in 69.6% dry cough in 59.4% anorexia in 39.9% myalgia in 34.8% dyspnea in 31.2% expectoration in 26.8% pharyngalgia in 17.4% diarrhea in 10.1% nausea in 10.1% dizziness in 9.4% headache 6.5% vomiting in 3.6% abdominal pain in 2.2% https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32031570-clinical-characteristics-of-138-hospitalized-patients-with-2019-novel-coronavirus-infected-pneumonia-in-wuhan-china/?dopt=Abstract https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32031570-clinical-characteri...
- dr_dshiv 7y agoIs it more appropriate to say that Covid-19 is dangerous if you are elderly or have pre-existing conditions? https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se...
- milemi 7y agoMedian age of admitted patients in the article above was 49. That’s not elderly. Also, only half of them had pre-existing conditions.
- bart_spoon 7y agoYour numbers aren’t matching other published statistics. For one, 81% of cases are considered mild. I don’t know how that is supposed to square with your statistic that 30% of patients need mechanical ventilation to survive. I agree that the disease is something to take seriously, but pushing incorrect information to fear monger is just wrong.
- tchaffee 7y agoAnecdotal. One data point shouldn't mean much to anyone.
- ianai 7y agoThis is a pretty dismissive thread and P.O.V. The point is the combination of all characteristics of it is bad. No one has a resistance to it because it’s novel. It looks to have an infection rate of 2 for 1 infected. It will likely reach huge numbers of people and kill orders of magnitude more than the usual flu. If it gets to a billion people we’re talking tens of millions dead.
- JohnStrangeII 7y agoTo add to this, what some people apparently don't realize is that those who get mild symptoms and ignore them or don't get tested and quarantined will almost certainly infect others who might die from it. It could be your elderly neighbor, your parents, grandparents, or an acquaintance with a compromised immune system.
- ianai 7y agoYep and there are far too many people who will gladly come to work very sick. I’ve suffered far too many examples in corporate America.
- ebiester 7y agoLet me know on day 8 or 9. That’s when you find out if you’re one of the lucky ones to develop pneumonia.
- username90 7y agoHe has already had it with symptoms for 2 weeks.
- bart_spoon 7y agoHe’s been sick for at least 11-12 days.
- eddyg 7y agoR0=2.2 and CFR=2.5% is all you need to know to realize this is not the “seasonal flu”. Look at the visualizations in this article[0] that compare the average number of people infected by each sick person and the fatality rate of various historical epidemics. [0] https://nyti.ms/38Xc1ho https://nyti.ms/38Xc1ho
- haunter 7y agoStill hard to believe to me that with the current numbers at least 30 million people will die. And we are not even at 3000 yet.
- dr_dshiv 7y agoWhy do we still call it "The Coronavirus", despite the fact that the common cold is caused by coronaviruses and rhinoviruses [1]? Like, with the H1N1 flu we had a more specific name. Isn't it morally important to provide the public with nuance? i.e., "there is a bad version of the common cold this year, so watch out, especially if you are over 60". [1] Falsey, A. R., Walsh, E. E., & Hayden, F. G. (2002). Rhinovirus and coronavirus infection-associated hospitalizations among older adults. The Journal of infectious diseases, 185(9), 1338-1341.
- 101404 7y agoBecause "journalism".
- spartas 7y agoSARS-CoV-2 is that "more specific name". I agree that it didn't help that it went without a specific name for a long period of time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndr...
- JohnStrangeII 7y agoWhy not? The name is easy to use and to pronounce and there is zero chance to confuse it with something else in the current context.
- ocho 7y agoAbout 2 months ago people had no idea what this new pneumonia-related disease is. It was called "The Mystery Flu" by NYT... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/06/world/asia/china-SARS-pneumonialike.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/06/world/asia/china-SARS-pne... It is not related to the "seasonal flu". It has been sequenced by chinese scientest very rapidly and it has been found to be a completely new virus. That why everyone is so excited about it. We don't know yet if its coming from bats, pigs, dogs, chicken or whatever. Bam! Its not fucking "seasonal flu". We already have that also.
- praptak 7y agoHumans are bad at gauging low probabilities. I for one cannot wrap my head around the actual badness of an event that has 2 percent chance of getting me killed. Taking the "average" approach, i.e. 2% loss of my expected remaining life time doesn't seem very good. # Yup, I know getting the virus is more than just a chance to die - you possibly infect others, get quarantined, etc.
- dr_dshiv 7y agoPlease keep in mind that the 2% rate does not apply to you. Check your own risk here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se...
- bart_spoon 7y agoPart of the reason humans are bad with probability is because they are bad at conditional probabilities. There is likely much less than a 2% chance you die from this. First that is assuming you will catch this disease. Even the most gloom and doom projections I’ve seen are saying that this virus will infect 40-70% of the worlds population. Which means the chance that you catch this and die from it is more like 1-1.5%. Outside of Wuhan, the death rate has been more like .7-1%, so now it’s more like .3-.7% chance you actually catch this and die. The numbers are far lower if you are not elderly, and have no pre-existing conditions. That isn’t to say the virus isn’t concerning, especially on a societal level. We absolutely should all be taking precautions to prevent the disease from spreading. But for a given individual, the probabilities of dying from this is very low.
- praptak 7y agoBy the "event" I neant specifically contracting the virus. The practical question is how far should I go to prevent getting it, which obviously depends on how bad this is.
- oceanplexian 7y ago> So now it’s more like .3-.7% chance you actually catch this and die Speaking of people being bad at probabilities.. A .3-.7 chance of death is still VERY dangerous. Your odds of dying of a car crash in any given year is 1 in 10,000. Your odds of dying from Coronavirus is 1 in 333 (at your best estimate). Yes this is absolutely serious at a societal level, and yes, you can die from this.
- asmint3 7y agoHe mentioned he’s participating in the clinical trial so there’s a chance he received Remdesivir treatment.
- 101404 7y agoIt's called "survivorship bias".
- sonicxxg 7y agoWhen >98% are surviving it, it's not much of a bias.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- mensetmanusman 7y agoI almost died from the type 2 strain of flu two years ago. Was out for almost 2 weeks straight. Wife found me under every blanket in the house wearing two coats with a 104.5 fever. I understand how this could be fatal to the elderly. We take care that no one is sick when we visit community centers.
- merricksb 7y agoEarlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22448502 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22448502