What Happens If I Start A Thread About That "Coronavirus" Thing...?

Greetings, All... S'Me. Yes There is already a Thread about this, but I did not want to possibly invite whatever may happen upon this Thread onto another (innocent!) User, so, I begin this separate Thread here (a bit like My "Climate Change" Thread).

In social media this is currently a hot/constant topic, and rightly so... yet I have certain views concerning it which I was wondering about. Please try to be nice and I apologise in advance if I offend/anger anyone...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1233679/coronavirus-update-symptoms-flu-2020-china-flu-deaths

...Apologies that this is from "The Daily Express", but it is about the closest to what I M'self was thinking about this 'Coro-Flu'-Thing currently going on. Social Media *loves* to highlight Death, Destruction, Suffering, Contagion, etc. etc... but I have seen VERY few articles mentioning "survival rate" rather than "death rate" about Coro-Flu... and fewer articles pointing out that it is a version of INFLUENZA. 

I suffer badly from FLU Myself, and so do all of the things now recommended ("Social distancing", hand washing, etc.) as a matter of course. But now it is recommended for all to do...

In Japan, wearing face-masks is a common practice, for example. 

Also, in this Thread, I am carefully wondering about the following approach... Coro-Flu is just ordinary Influenza but has an "Identifiable Tag" of sorts; and that if *all* Influenza-s were able to be tracked in this way, then all of the statistics would be similar. (Regardless of starting point.)

...Pretty much post whatever You may want, anyone... I am seeking opinion. Even ordinary Influenza is not nice at all, but it is *not necessarily fatal*, and that is what was difficult to find out about this Coro-Flu-Thing.

Parents
  • This summary of the estimated Case Mortality Ratio suggests that you are on the right track. It's worth reading it through to see the caveats about the headline figure - i.e. underestimation of the number of cases due to mild infections not being reported, variances due to availability of healthcare, etc. The ratio for areas of China outside of Wuhan is in the same ball-park as seasonal flu, for example.

    Transmission rate estimates that I've seen, including in the WHO report, suggest around 10% for those in close contact, and substantially lower for casual contact - again, not exactly the Black Death.

    My overall impression is that, as you suggest, it is most likely no more serious than many seasonal flu viruses, and that with elections/Brexit etc. now fading from the news, and the virus having been dubbed with some catchy names, there's a lot of scare-mongering going on to generate click-throughs for online "news" sources and newspaper sales. The WHO have been jittery ever since the Ebola scare, which they did handle extremely badly, and there has been quite a bit of criticism that they've bowed under the "image management" of the Chinese authorities who are desperate not to look culpable for reacting poorly in Wuhan.

    That's not to say that we shouldn't all be careful, of course we should; but the degree of panic seems to me out of all proportion with any empirical estimations of the real danger.

Reply
  • This summary of the estimated Case Mortality Ratio suggests that you are on the right track. It's worth reading it through to see the caveats about the headline figure - i.e. underestimation of the number of cases due to mild infections not being reported, variances due to availability of healthcare, etc. The ratio for areas of China outside of Wuhan is in the same ball-park as seasonal flu, for example.

    Transmission rate estimates that I've seen, including in the WHO report, suggest around 10% for those in close contact, and substantially lower for casual contact - again, not exactly the Black Death.

    My overall impression is that, as you suggest, it is most likely no more serious than many seasonal flu viruses, and that with elections/Brexit etc. now fading from the news, and the virus having been dubbed with some catchy names, there's a lot of scare-mongering going on to generate click-throughs for online "news" sources and newspaper sales. The WHO have been jittery ever since the Ebola scare, which they did handle extremely badly, and there has been quite a bit of criticism that they've bowed under the "image management" of the Chinese authorities who are desperate not to look culpable for reacting poorly in Wuhan.

    That's not to say that we shouldn't all be careful, of course we should; but the degree of panic seems to me out of all proportion with any empirical estimations of the real danger.

Children
  • I agree with you, and I think that the way that the media has been stoking this for weeks now is pretty unforgivable really. I can't really work out why they would be doing it. Sure they have to report the facts etc, but not blow them up to hysterical proportions which they have been doing. I'm sure that a lot of people that take an interest in these forums are easily frightened by things like this and there does not seem to be much reassurance going on. Not good.