I think _everyone's_ understanding of the situation is quite poor, not just the public's. If you read studies of the previous epidemics such as SARS, H1N1 etc,

I think _everyone's_ understanding of the situation is quite poor, not just the public's. If you read studies of the previous epidemics such as SARS, H1N1 etc, you will see that early in the epidemic cycle everyone tends to exaggerate the impact in all aspects, sometimes by orders of magnitude, in part because it's safer to err on the side of caution rather than not be cautious enough, and in part for selfish reasons ("woo-hoo, I get my 15 minutes of fame after working for peanuts in some godforsaken epidemiology lab for a decade"), but mostly the former. For bird flu, for example, the initial prediction was "up to" 150M deaths worldwide: https://slate.com/technology/2009/05/the-problems-with-the-world-health-organization-s-approach-to-pandemics.html#:~:text=Back%20in%20the%20fall%20of,could%20die%20of%20bird%20flu.&text=The%20WHO's%20Global%20Influenza%20Preparedness,the%20H5N1%20avian%20flu%20scare https://slate.com/technology/2009/05/the-problems-with-the-w.... This estimate, supposedly, came from one of he most "informed" people in the world. People just hate unknowns, and especially "unknown unknowns" and therefore latch onto the most dramatic damage estimates and act accordingly, often further exacerbating the situation.