seems that several oral publications of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine efficacy are done orally in different countries.
would like to see a full paper.
Topic: Coronavirus Outbreak - page 119. (Read 29937 times)
''How long are we meant to self-isolate for?'' As long as we have to mate. 'Is this going to happen everytime a new form of SARS appears?' Yes if it's serious enough, quit crying about it, not everything has a good solution.
You’re the one who should quit crying. Or else, good luck, um, eating. As a practical matter, your proposed rule is a most excellent plan for totally imploding a fragile, technocratic globalized civilization based on centralization and long supply chains and... (why do I even bother?)
It's a pretty crazy situation. If the virus doesn't recede significantly over the summer, will we stay on global lockdown for 1 year+, while waiting for a vaccine?
A technocratic, industrialized, globalized international economy based on massive centralization and long supply chains cannot survive such a scenario as “global lockdown for 1 year+”.
That is why I accuse headless-chicken governments of destroying the world in a futile attempt to save it from a virus that is not being significantly slowed by all the lockdowns.
My concern is distinct from theymos’ and hilarious’ concerns about the economy. I don’t share the general worldview of economic thinking—although I think that they are evaluating this situation rationally, for the most part. Stop panicking!
Between the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, I fear Famine. I do not fear Plague (at least, not in this instance). I do fear War. I have never feared Death; and I do not intend to start now.
The Earth is ridiculously overpopulated. A long-term global lockdown proximately causing deindustrialization and famine could help to knock off a few billion talking apes. Maybe it is not such a bad idea after all?
~
I agree with TECSHARE on this. Who would've thought.
I hope not with this part of the international quotation that I just snipped:
The issue is not that this disease is just so fatally dangerous, but that is is just dangerous enough, and mostly debilitating with many requiring long hospital stays to treat. This disease has a unique combination of long viability on surfaces, being airborne, long incubation periods, passive carriers, and high rates of infection that is basically like a checklist of all the things you would put into a disease you intend to cause a pandemic.
Cf.:
I have a high level of confidence that this is a bioweapon, and will lead to open war. Even if it isn't, it looks like it, and that might be enough to ignite tensions.
Those who habitually spew twisted illogic, quack junk, and extraordinary claims on the basis of merest speculation (not to mention lies about other people) do not suddenly start making sense, unless they radically change their worldviews. That is psychologically difficult, almost impossible; and it requires an extraordinary mind which would be unlikely to believe nonsense in the first instance. TEChSHARE remains the same artless Techy as always; and the probability approaches one that he always will. That is why I distrust him as a person.
We're gonna run out of beds, doctors will have to decide who dies and who doesn't, it's going to suck.
People are going to die. Yes. That’s life.
I find myself arguing against each and all of:
- Panic.
- Fantastic dolts who suppose that SARS-CoV-2 must be somehow of different origins from the 2002–03 SARS-CoV. Wow, a zoonotic jumped species—as has doubtless been the origin of countless diseases throughout the whole history of all living creatures on Earth. It is closely related to another zoonotic that also jumped species. Clearly, the most likely explanation is that this is a genetically engineered bioweapon!
- Panic.
- Destroying all that remains of civilization, for the purpose of failing to save it.
- Panic.
- Tyranny. The naïve, fallible mortal human in me is shocked that nobody notices we have instantaneously entered an era of global dictatorship, without any significant resistance or even protest. The dispassionate scholar knows human nature, and is therefore not surprised. The new normality is that every government everywhere can issue any “emergency” order they want, and nobody will even complain! WTF. Are you awake? (Nice question.)
- Panic.
My own perspective: Humans endured plagues for all time before modern history. There are now two significant differences:
- Technology makes plagues spread much faster. I shudder to imagine the Black Death in the era of aeroplanes and automobiles. Could happen someday—is not the coronavirus situation. Many coronavirus-type incidents have probably occurred over the centuries, but remained local, minor, barely worth remark.
Indeed, I would suggest that Chinese scholars should probably examine the question of whether there is any evidence of previous SARS outbreaks, before modern times. My hypothesis: Variants of this virus have jumped to humans many times within the five millennia for which at least some historical record may exist. Minor local outbreaks may have burned out without leaving any historical evidence that would be extant today (especially after the last century’s upheavals destroyed much historical evidence in China). Thus, a negative cannot be proved (as is oft the case with historical hypotheses).
I do think that’s an important question; and it is just the type of question that nobody thinks of. - Modernity has made humans soft and weak. Soft, weak creatures do not survive. In this context, I mean that collectively, in the long run. Sooner or later, humans have a high risk of going extinct due to having degenerated into wimps who are totally maladapted to the harsh conditions of life in this world. Evolution is blind: It does not always “progress” or “advance” a species with godlike intentions, as commonly assumed and implied by pseudoscientific liberals.
I never said that the virus is not bad (although I think its level of badness is much exaggerated, whereas people have faced much worse historically).
I never said that people will not die. Actually, I am of the opinion that everybody dies someday.
I said and say, stop panicking. If the current trend does not soon change, then a relatively moderate global epidemic of coronavirus will have ushered in a new era of mass starvation. It has already inaugurated global tyranny, the full extent of which has yet to be seen.
Lockdowns don’t help with that—and probably won’t help the old folks in the end.
Lockdowns, if implemented early enough and supported by other measures, can help to slow down the spread, which may be the difference between life and death for a lot of people. If you insist on killing yourself that's your business but you probably shouldn't be making that decision for anyone else.
Italy we have a open sky laboratory on lockdowns.
We had two zones in northern Italy where the disease initially spread.
The first was the one that actually has been quickly locked down almost one month ago. it was a few small village in a rural area. They sent the army patrolling it (quasi-Chinese approach). The people were smart enough to understand the risk and followed the rules closely (being a rural environment helped a lot imho. The disease has almost disappeared, today, no new infections in the last few days.
The other one was inexplicably missed out. A few cases not correctly diagnosed, as there they followed the "general Italian rule of lockdowns". The disease was in the wild for a few weeks with people going on with their businesses as usual. Result is the hospital in that zone (near the mountains) are now close to collapse. I saw a video on WhatsApp (anedoctical evidence I know, with 4x obituaries than usual, none of them diagnosed).
Also Milan, the main city close to the epicenter of the disease, with the best hospital in the country, is ready for the "battle of Milan" facing unprecedented pressure on the health system. Again, anedotical evidence, of many people with symptoms not tested nor accepted in the hospitals because of the critical situation.
I found this graph details the new cases on those provinces.
The the green one is the first put in lockdown, while the yellow is the one I was referring to into my previous message: the difference is clear, and also clear how important is to respect the rules.
(the blue line is Milan, the main northern city).
what makes you think everyone is going to get infected?
...all of the things? 2 week asymptomatic spread, persists outside the body for up to 9 days, R0 of 6, doubling time of infected is about 6 days.There is no natural immunity as this is a mutated animal virus, it can't be contained and the spread is exponential. Everyone is absolutely going to get infected.
Dude, you're comparing apples with bananas here.
Do you even look at your own links?
The "mystery" of higher death figures of italy vs. south corea is already solved.
Also, you can't compare yearly flu data with a few months of Covid data.
There is a huge amount of common sense missing in your posts.
That was my last try to discuss this with you.
Do you even look at your own links?
The "mystery" of higher death figures of italy vs. south corea is already solved.
Also, you can't compare yearly flu data with a few months of Covid data.
There is a huge amount of common sense missing in your posts.
That was my last try to discuss this with you.
I get really bad throat infections with flu-like symptoms a few times a year and they're very unpleasant for a few days to a week but as with the flu young/healthy people will likely get over it. It just seems to be mostly killing the already nearly-dead with underlying health conditions anyway and they're probably the ones that need to self-isolate unless it starts killing anyone else.
Yesterday, a 48 year old woman died with no known preconditions in self quarantine.
I have read reports of deaths of formerly healthy doctors and nurses in wuhan, died of covid in their early 30's.
Don't be too sure...
Where from and what's the source? Also, I'm not sure of anything, but until people start dropping like flies I'll continue to believe it's probably over-hyped and one or two young people dying doesn't mean much or scare me. I know of two people who died of heart attacks in their 20's but that's a rare occurrence and there's usually something else going on with them for that to happen. There's always going to be outliers but that doesn't mean to say the entire world needs to panic like it is right now.
From Austria. Source: National Newspapers. Exact cause of death to be examined, that's why it's not added to the Covid statistics yet.
Quote
I wonder how those figure compare to flu deaths.
1 per 1000 of population, German scientisthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn074EB5NNY&feature=youtu.be
Complete BS.
The fatality rate of people infected by influenza (aka "the flu") is 0,1%. Your numbers would mean Germany's population is only a few hundred thousands, because a few hundred people die because of the flu there each year. This winter only about 200 so far.
Again: 1-2 out of of 1000 infected influenza cases die. Mainly people over 60 years of age.
Covid fatality will likely be between 2% and 10%. "Just a flu"...
All-cause mortality levels in up to 24 European countries (maybe someone can point out the pantemic part)
http://www.euromomo.eu/index.html
Italy pop 2018 60,391,000, so per year 6039
In the US a common used figure is 37000 per year https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm
Has Italy become a thirth world country, has lost data for 2 days, almost 50% mortality rate and cant get people healty, total contrast to South Korea
Think about that
China and Italy patient 0 can not be located, what does that mean? How can that be?
I get really bad throat infections with flu-like symptoms a few times a year and they're very unpleasant for a few days to a week but as with the flu young/healthy people will likely get over it. It just seems to be mostly killing the already nearly-dead with underlying health conditions anyway and they're probably the ones that need to self-isolate unless it starts killing anyone else.
Yesterday, a 48 year old woman died with no known preconditions in self quarantine.
I have read reports of deaths of formerly healthy doctors and nurses in wuhan, died of covid in their early 30's.
Don't be too sure...
Where from and what's the source? Also, I'm not sure of anything, but until people start dropping like flies I'll continue to believe it's probably over-hyped and one or two young people dying doesn't mean much or scare me. I know of two people who died of heart attacks in their 20's but that's a rare occurrence and there's usually something else going on with them for that to happen. There's always going to be outliers but that doesn't mean to say the entire world needs to panic like it is right now.
From Austria. Source: National Newspapers. Exact cause of death to be examined, that's why it's not added to the Covid statistics yet.
Quote
I wonder how those figure compare to flu deaths.
1 per 1000 of population, German scientisthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn074EB5NNY&feature=youtu.be
Complete BS.
The fatality rate of people infected by influenza (aka "the flu") is 0,1%. Your numbers would mean Germany's population is only a few hundred thousands, because a few hundred people die because of the flu there each year. This winter only about 200 so far.
Again: 1-2 out of of 1000 infected influenza cases die. Mainly people over 60 years of age.
Covid fatality will likely be between 2% and 10%. "Just a flu"...
@Bold: Nearly dead people? It killed a 21-year-old coach of Spain. Diabetes is one of the conditions found in patients who are dying and it is not that fatal while people over 60 cannot be considered as nearly dead people
I said mostly. Besides, that coach had cancer:
Quote
A 21-year-old Spanish football coach has died from coronavirus, having been suffering from a form of leukaemia.
You said "mostly killing the already nearly-dead with underlying health conditions anyway".
This is not true as those with health conditions aren't nearly-dead in any sense and many people have recovered from cancer too. If you claim them to be already dead and that statement seems as if it's fine as those people died, that's wrong to say. They had a disease and couldn't handle the second one which claimed their lives else they could "live" with the former disease. Also, those who recovered again got the same virus in some cases and it's not sure that once you recover you are absolutely fit again.
Quote
Dr. Xiao said that some patients in China recovered but got sick again, apparently because they had damaged and vulnerable lung tissue that was subsequently attacked by bacteria in their body. Some of those patients ended up dying from a bacterial infection, not the virus. But that didn’t appear to cause the majority of deaths, he said.
https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-body-symptoms.html
I get you are worried about the economy but during every pandemic, the economy is already affected. If Governments don't impose lock downs, the entire country would be infected so how would that not affect the economy? If the Government doesn't take it seriously and starts saying it's safe as only people who are nearly dead and above 60 are dying, the people would stop believing in such a Government.
In Italy already beds are falling shorts and there are problems with burials and we are talking about a country with 60 million people where 31k cases are reported. I can't imagine if all people move about freely (whether old or not) and get sick, what the country would turn to.
Italy is rationing their medical care and prioritizing based on their chances of survival. If there is an otherwise healthy person and a person with other health issues, the person who has other health issues will not receive medical care because the Italian medical system is at capacity. Both need medical care to survive so the otherwise healthy person has a chance of survival while the person with other health issues is almost certain to die, even though their chances would be much better had they received care.
This is why there cannot be too many people sick at once. The health system has a limited capacity and can prevent most deaths of those who it is caring for.
While we are fighting the coronavirus, the travel/entertainment/tourism industries will be near non-existent, and long term the world economy will likely look different than it does today.
This is why there cannot be too many people sick at once. The health system has a limited capacity and can prevent most deaths of those who it is caring for.
While we are fighting the coronavirus, the travel/entertainment/tourism industries will be near non-existent, and long term the world economy will likely look different than it does today.
Well of course if everyone gets infected deaths would be high, but what makes you think everyone is going to get infected? How do you know this is going to infect 80-90% of people? And the economy will collapse if everyone is told to stay in doors for however long never-mind the hospitals. How long are we meant to self-isolate for? I don't think staying indoors for a few months is going to cut it and even that would be disastrous. If it's as extreme as you say then why isn't there a full on lock-down for everyone already? Telling people to just not go to the cinema or sporting events isn't going to do anything if everyone is still going to work etc. How often are we going to have to self-isolate for before the coast is clear? Is this going to happen everytime a new form of SARS appears?
People keep explaining to you why this needs to be done but you aren't listening. It isn't long term going to stop infections from spreading to nearly everyone, but it WILL SLOW IT. This gives the medical system and the supply chains critically needed time do adjust and absorb the overwhelming demand, and hopefully prevent a total breakdown of the global healthcare system.
The issue is not that this disease is just so fatally dangerous, but that is is just dangerous enough, and mostly debilitating with many requiring long hospital stays to treat. This disease has a unique combination of long viability on surfaces, being airborne, long incubation periods, passive carriers, and high rates of infection that is basically like a checklist of all the things you would put into a disease you intend to cause a pandemic.
Again, the rate of fatality alone is not the major threat, the number of people debilitated and requiring hospitalization all at once all over the globe is the real threat. Quarantines slow that infection curve down, and hopefully gives the system time to adjust and compensate for this huge wave of hospitalizations that is about to happen all over the world.
I agree with TECSHARE on this. Who would've thought.
We're gonna run out of beds, doctors will have to decide who dies and who doesn't, it's going to suck.
Well of course if everyone gets infected deaths would be high, but what makes you think everyone is going to get infected? How do you know this is going to infect 80-90% of people? And the economy will collapse if everyone is told to stay in doors for however long never-mind the hospitals. How long are we meant to self-isolate for? I don't think staying indoors for a few months is going to cut it and even that would be disastrous. If it's as extreme as you say then why isn't there a full on lock-down for everyone already? Telling people to just not go to the cinema or sporting events isn't going to do anything if everyone is still going to work etc. How often are we going to have to self-isolate for before the coast is clear? Is this going to happen everytime a new form of SARS appears?
People keep explaining to you why this needs to be done but you aren't listening. It isn't long term going to stop infections from spreading to nearly everyone, but it WILL SLOW IT. This gives the medical system and the supply chains critically needed time do adjust and absorb the overwhelming demand, and hopefully prevent a total breakdown of the global healthcare system.
The issue is not that this disease is just so fatally dangerous, but that is is just dangerous enough, and mostly debilitating with many requiring long hospital stays to treat. This disease has a unique combination of long viability on surfaces, being airborne, long incubation periods, passive carriers, and high rates of infection that is basically like a checklist of all the things you would put into a disease you intend to cause a pandemic.
Again, the rate of fatality alone is not the major threat, the number of people debilitated and requiring hospitalization all at once all over the globe is the real threat. Quarantines slow that infection curve down, and hopefully gives the system time to adjust and compensate for this huge wave of hospitalizations that is about to happen all over the world.
You don't seem to understand the problem. If everyone gets infected, the deaths will be way higher or just as high. Anyways that's not even the problem, the problem is that this 'flu' is extremely contagious and without any measures taken it will spread extremely fast infecting 80-90% of the population in any country within months. No healthcare system can sustain that and would collapse. Do you not understand that?
Well of course if everyone gets infected deaths would be high, but what makes you think everyone is going to get infected? How do you know this is going to infect 80-90% of people? And the economy will collapse if everyone is told to stay in doors for however long never-mind the hospitals. How long are we meant to self-isolate for? I don't think staying indoors for a few months is going to cut it and even that would be disastrous. If it's as extreme as you say then why isn't there a full on lock-down for everyone already? Telling people to just not go to the cinema or sporting events isn't going to do anything if everyone is still going to work etc. How often are we going to have to self-isolate for before the coast is clear? Is this going to happen everytime a new form of SARS appears?
That's what scientists are predicting. In the US alone: 'The CDC reportedly predicted 160 million to 214 million infections, 2.4 million to 21 million hospitalizations and 200,000 to 1.7 million deaths in the country. ' It's not 90%, my bad, it's more like 70%, my point still stands though.
''How long are we meant to self-isolate for?'' As long as we have to mate. 'Is this going to happen everytime a new form of SARS appears?' Yes if it's serious enough, quit crying about it, not everything has a good solution.
Quote
I wonder how those figure compare to flu deaths.
1 per 1000 of population, German scientisthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn074EB5NNY&feature=youtu.be
Italy pop 2018 60,391,000, per year 6039
US a common used figure is 37000 per year https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2713
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
You don't seem to understand the problem. If everyone gets infected, the deaths will be way higher or just as high. Anyways that's not even the problem, the problem is that this 'flu' is extremely contagious and without any measures taken it will spread extremely fast infecting 80-90% of the population in any country within months. No healthcare system can sustain that and would collapse. Do you not understand that?
Well of course if everyone gets infected deaths would be high, but what makes you think everyone is going to get infected? How do you know this is going to infect 80-90% of people? And the economy will collapse if everyone is told to stay in doors for however long never-mind the hospitals. How long are we meant to self-isolate for? I don't think staying indoors for a few months is going to cut it and even that would be disastrous. If it's as extreme as you say then why isn't there a full on lock-down for everyone already? Telling people to just not go to the cinema or sporting events isn't going to do anything if everyone is still going to work etc. How often are we going to have to self-isolate for before the coast is clear? Is this going to happen everytime a new form of SARS appears?
@Bold: Nearly dead people? It killed a 21-year-old coach of Spain. Diabetes is one of the conditions found in patients who are dying and it is not that fatal while people over 60 cannot be considered as nearly dead people
I said mostly. Besides, that coach had cancer:
Look at Italy.
According to this basically nobody under 50 is dying:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Italy#Statistics
I wonder how those figure compare to flu deaths.
and staying at home for a few weeks is a small price to pay.
But is it just going to be for a couple of weeks? I'd be happy to stay at home for a few weeks and I work from home anyway, but I don't think this is going to go away within a few weeks and the damage to the economy could takes years to recover at best, decades at worst.
Bravado among predominantly young healthy members of this forum is understandable. That doesn't work for those who have a high risk of complications from this virus unless you want to go full Darwin on them and just let them die. I'm kinda attached to a couple high-risk family members so I'm glad that schools and other virus-breeding places around here are closed.
Well then they're the ones that obviously should be self-isolating and anyone is free to do that. I wouldn't advise elderly people to be gallivanting around town, but nobody lives forever.
Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for treatment AND prevention of COVID-19. Fox News and also in Journal Nature
https://twitter.com/JillRTeamXRP/status/1239741344576425984
Lockdowns don’t help with that—and probably won’t help the old folks in the end.
Lockdowns, if implemented early enough and supported by other measures, can help to slow down the spread, which may be the difference between life and death for a lot of people. If you insist on killing yourself that's your business but you probably shouldn't be making that decision for anyone else.
Italy we have a open sky laboratory on lockdowns.
We had two zones in northern Italy where the disease initially spread.
The first was the one that actually has been quickly locked down almost one month ago. it was a few small village in a rural area. They sent the army patrolling it (quasi-Chinese approach). The people were smart enough to understand the risk and followed the rules closely (being a rural environment helped a lot imho. The disease has almost disappeared, today, no new infections in the last few days.
The other one was inexplicably missed out. A few cases not correctly diagnosed, as there they followed the "general Italian rule of lockdowns". The disease was in the wild for a few weeks with people going on with their businesses as usual. Result is the hospital in that zone (near the mountains) are now close to collapse. I saw a video on WhatsApp (anedoctical evidence I know, with 4x obituaries than usual, none of them diagnosed).
Also Milan, the main city close to the epicenter of the disease, with the best hospital in the country, is ready for the "battle of Milan" facing unprecedented pressure on the health system. Again, anedotical evidence, of many people with symptoms not tested nor accepted in the hospitals because of the critical situation.
...
but this social distancing thing to 'delay' will effect things because wuhan took 2 month in panic mode so this can be 3-6month for countries that do take this more 'delay' tactic
...
but this social distancing thing to 'delay' will effect things because wuhan took 2 month in panic mode so this can be 3-6month for countries that do take this more 'delay' tactic
...
I suspect that we are probably almost all going to get the shit if the parameters (r0, incubation, etc) being promoted are close to true.
Delaying the thing is probably the most important on an individual level for two reasons:
1) These things tend to lose their lethality as the mutate, and they mutate extraordinarily quickly. This would be especially the case of the 'gain of function' (lethality, survivability, etc) if was artificially engineered as I believe likely for this one (and SARS and MERS before it.)
2) As time goes by more and more protocols will be developed and proven. Some of them which make use of drugs which are not patented/patentable (Vitamin C, Chloroquine, etc) will be hushed up and derided in mainstream because big pharma won't get their payday. But over time information about them will leak out through the censorship. Best to get it when more information is freed up.
I am neither young nor healthy.
Sucks for you. Look up "predominantly" in the dictionary.
However, as I have said repeatedly, life is risk. It would be awfully hypocritical of me to preach about courage, then turn around and demand that healthy young people destroy the world and embrace unlimited tyranny because I got panicked about a personal risk to myself.
Staying at home is not tyranny. Nor is this about your personal risk.
Lockdowns don’t help with that—and probably won’t help the old folks in the end.
Lockdowns, if implemented early enough and supported by other measures, can help to slow down the spread, which may be the difference between life and death for a lot of people. If you insist on killing yourself that's your business but you probably shouldn't be making that decision for anyone else.
Bravado among predominantly young healthy members of this forum is understandable. That doesn't work for those who have a high risk of complications from this virus
I take insult at your broad-brush statement based on unwarranted assumptions.
I am neither young nor healthy. Without disclosing personal details that may compromise my privacy, I will note that I am at significantly higher than average risk of death from coronavirus.
However, as I have said repeatedly, life is risk. It would be awfully hypocritical of me to preach about courage, then turn around and demand that healthy young people destroy the world and embrace unlimited tyranny because I got panicked about a personal risk to myself.
My first public message about the coronavirus:
Dear readers of the forum:
Some of you will die from the coronavirus. (—Some few of you: The virus has low lethality except to the aged or otherwise frail.) The virus may kill me, too; maybe, maybe not. That is acceptable: Life is risk, and death is a part of life. My only sadness is that sometimes, the worst befalls the best of people.
Some of you will die from the coronavirus. (—Some few of you: The virus has low lethality except to the aged or otherwise frail.) The virus may kill me, too; maybe, maybe not. That is acceptable: Life is risk, and death is a part of life. My only sadness is that sometimes, the worst befalls the best of people.
unless you want to go full Darwin on them and just let them die.
I myself want to go much more than “full Darwin” on anybody who panics.
I'm kinda attached to a couple high-risk family members
So am I. I have been quietly advising people (online and IRL) to spend some quality time with anyone elderly or frail whom they care about. It may be your last chance.
Lockdowns don’t help with that—and probably won’t help the old folks in the end.
People are panicking about this to an unbelievable extent. It's a bad disease, to be sure, and some precautions should be taken, but it's not worth putting the entire economy on hold. For example, maybe it'd be a good idea to 100% lock-down nursing homes, but cancelling all university classes and sporting events, or locking down entire countries, or stopping trade between the biggest economies in the world? I think we'll look back at this in a couple of years and see this as a huge hypochondriacal overreaction which kicked off quite a damaging recession. (Though the economy was already unstable in many ways: it's not just the virus.)
Agreed. They're going way overboard with this. Barely anyone is dying here especially when you compare it to other things like the flu. Keep calm and carry on in my opinion. If it goes full on zombie apocalypse then we can stay inside but doing this shit now is overkill and incredibly damaging in multiple ways. There's only been about 50 deaths so far in the UK. Flu kills about 50 a day, 20 people kill themselves every day and there's 450 die of cancer every day just in the UK but nobody's going hysteric over them. This is going to do do ridiculous damage to the economy which could take years to recover from and lots of business are going to go under, especially ones like airlines. I have a friend who's a self-employed personal trainer and pretty much all of his clients have cancelled this week already out of fear. He'll be out of business within the month if this continues.
(I recently had all of the symptoms of the virus. I wonder if I had it, or if it was just the ordinary flu. It was very unpleasant, though I got over it in a few days.)
I get really bad throat infections with flu-like symptoms a few times a year and they're very unpleasant for a few days to a week but as with the flu young/healthy people will likely get over it. It just seems to be mostly killing the already nearly-dead with underlying health conditions anyway and they're probably the ones that need to self-isolate unless it starts killing anyone else.
This is not cancer that's not contagious. The story about the 31st case in S. Korea who spread the virus to 2000+ people itself proves how dangerous it can be. Some are not worried about getting it but are worried about the other elders in their home who have a weaker immune system and even their kids. It's not a panic situation but nobody can just chill over it saying it's fine. People in Italy aren't even getting tested unless their condition is serious and the hospitals are full. Other countries too aren't testing all the patients that come in so imagine if those that have mild symptoms and move about, how many people they can infect.
@Bold: Nearly dead people? It killed a 21-year-old coach of Spain. Diabetes is one of the conditions found in patients who are dying and it is not that fatal while people over 60 cannot be considered as nearly dead people
Jump to: