> There has been confidence all around from seemingly credible sources - acting on too early and thin data about what measures were effective or non-effective,

> There has been confidence all around from seemingly credible sources - acting on too early and thin data about what measures were effective or non-effective, many of which have been reversed in the last couple of weeks. This is true. In late February/early March there was a medical doctor who appeared in several local news segments here in Seattle. This doctor quoted a very misleading statistic about your chance of catching it ("you have a 0.5% chance of catching the virus"). I was intrigued by this obvious falsehood, and saw that it was also featured in a memo from one of our local hospital systems. Where did they get it from? A CDC study. That CDC study looked at the first handful of patients to have confirmed COVID-19 in the US (all travel related) and traced their confirmed contacts. Sure enough - 0.5% of the contacts traced within this group acquired the virus. Extrapolating this study to suggest that one's chance of catching the virus in the community, 6 weeks after the study was 0.5% was just a monstrous abdication of responsible communication.