
WHO says it no longer uses 'pandemic' category, but virus still emergency - jacquesm
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who/who-says-no-longer-uses-pandemic-category-but-virus-still-emergency-idUKKCN20I0N8
======
RegnisGnaw
Remember that the WHO has no real power, its a coordination body at the best.
Its not like the US CDC which can impose restrictions and rules in the US. The
WHO can't go into a country without that country's approval. They rely on that
country giving out information. So in another words, the WHO must convince the
country in question that its in their best interest to cooperate with the WHO.

One CBC article says it the best:

 _The WHO doesn 't have the authority to tell Xi Jingping what to do, let
alone take over the fight on the ground. All it can do is engage in what is
known as disease diplomacy, and try to convince China that its interests and
the world's concerns are completely aligned.

"In some ways the SARS outbreak taught the WHO that you have to have the
country that is most affected — the epicentre of the outbreak — on its side.
It can't risk alienating the Chinese," says Lee. "I'm sure they know that
they're not getting full co-operation, but they're still trying to encourage
that."_

[https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/china-coronavirus-cover-up-
cl...](https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/china-coronavirus-cover-up-
claims-1.5471946)

~~~
sremani
The No.1 contributor to WHO budget is US tax payer, and the leadership of WHO
was begging countries like US not to close flight routes to China in the midst
of rapidly spreading disease.

For any observer casual or otherwise it is evident WHO leadership is more
worried about being on the good side of China than the health of the world.

~~~
jerf
It's been over 100 years since the world has had a pandemic. It is frankly
entirely predictable that we don't really know what to do when one happens,
and that we'll collectively be generally complacent until it is on where ever
our doorstep happens to be.

I'm not one with a high opinion of global governance anyhow, but even if it
was competent it would be incompetent, because the _competent_ thing to do for
so long has been to assume "not going to be a pandemic". There isn't really a
solution to these sorts of fat-tail outcomes; you can't spend trillions
planning for them all the time because even if you do, your funding will be
cut, but then when the time comes, you won't be prepared.

~~~
blub
"It is frankly entirely predictable that we don't really know what to do when
one happens, and that we'll collectively be generally complacent until it is
on where ever our doorstep happens to be."

Maybe your average Joe wouldn't know what to do, but if the leaders of the
organization which is supposed to globally manage such situations don't really
know what do to, then they should all be replaced. That's literally their job.

~~~
jerf
Ironically, I think that's exactly backwards. Average Joes actually have a
chance of getting this right. Institutions are the ones that essentially
can't, because if they treated pandemics correctly in the past several
decades, they'd be defunded for wasting money on the fat tail events that
could have happened, but didn't, so clearly, they don't need that money.

You're thinking in terms of people; you need to think in terms of
organizations, which are in some ways just people writ large, but in other
very important ways, are _not_ just people writ large. It would be completely
plausible and understandable that the majority of _individuals_ in the WHO or
CDC are aware of some truly bad thing in progress even as the _organization_
is telling everyone not to worry and just stay calm at all costs. It's hard to
grok, but it's the way it is.

------
twostorytower
I think this virus is getting sincerely underestimated in our echo chamber,
and it's only because the reported cases in the US have been low. If Italy has
multiple quarantine zones, think about how many travelers are coming back from
Italy who are probably infected but don't even know it yet. I hope I'm wrong.

~~~
almost_usual
I don’t believe it is, the virus can be quarantined efficiently if the country
is responsive to the outbreaks. Vietnam had early outbreaks, quarantined areas
via a ring system, and the country has contained the virus very well.

This is a country that is poorer than South Korea, Japan, or Italy and shares
a border with China.

~~~
ergothus
I'm not trying to fear-monger here, so please don't read that as my intent.

Are you sure though? An "outbreak" is detected by someone having symptoms, by
which time they've infected others. If you're an in area with lots of
travelers, by the time you have an outbreak, it's already moved on.

I'm watching South Korea - they have plenty of travel, a good population, and
an effective government. If they can contain it, that's a good sign, if not,
likely a portent of what the western world can expect if carriers become more
numerous. So far too early to say, but that's where I'm looking. (And I'm no
expert at all, so if anyone has reasons that I'm looking in the wrong place as
a bellweather, please share).

My real issue is the lack of good info. We've gotten an R0, but I've not heard
anyone express confidence in the results of infection (another commenter
suggested 20% require respiratory assistance, but is that of flat infected or
of those that are detected as infected in part BECAUSE their symptoms are
serious?)

~~~
Filligree
> another commenter suggested 20% require respiratory assistance, but is that
> of flat infected or of those that are detected as infected in part BECAUSE
> their symptoms are serious?

The latter. Unfortunately we don't know what fraction of cases are detected,
but it's believed to be around 10%.

~~~
jacquesm
Interesting in this context is to look at the postmortem of the previous
pandemic in 2009, the number of cases initially confirmed and the final tally
over the same period once all the facts were in.

The relevant wikipedia bit:

"A flu follow-up study done in September 2010, found that "the risk of most
serious complications was not elevated in adults or children."[31] In a 5
August 2011 PLoS ONE article, researchers estimated that the 2009 H1N1 global
infection rate was 11% to 21%, lower than what was previously expected.[32]
However, by 2012, research showed that as many as 579,000 people could have
been killed by the disease, as only those fatalities confirmed by laboratory
testing were included in the original number, and meant that many of those
without access to health facilities went uncounted. The majority of these
deaths occurred in Africa and Southeast Asia. Experts, including the WHO, have
agreed that an estimated 284,500 people were killed by the disease, much
higher than the initial death toll."

From:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_flu_pandemic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_flu_pandemic)

------
specialp
It is going to be a "pandemic" regardless of what we do short of sealing off
all travel for a long time. It does not kill a vast majority of the people it
infects unlike Ebola so there will always be a large pool of carriers and the
time it remains in circulation will be much longer. So if anything this is
being underhyped. It is going to spread everywhere eventually.

~~~
bluGill
There are already vaccine prototypes in the lab. The hope is we can delay the
spread long enough that they can get out of the lab and into mass production.
Next years flu shot could contain this as well if all goes perfect. If we can
just hold back until then we are okay. That is a big if though.

~~~
cycrutchfield
That is at least 12-18 months away

~~~
bluGill
That is why I used works like "hope" and "big if". If everything goes perfect
it can happen. It only needs one of the early attempts to turn out to work, do
great in early testing and be easy to manufacture. Easy to manufacture depends
on scale - if the virus turns out to be spreading fast it will be easier to
manufacture because a lot of resources will be put into building the ability
to make whatever turns out to work.

Safety becomes less important in the worst cases too. If you have a 1% chance
of going blind from the vaccine, or a 20% chance of death, a vaccine that
would normally fail tests looks good. (20% chance of death of course means the
virus mutates to both spread faster and kill more people - generally unlikely)

------
justinzollars
With China's rise this is our weird new future. Western institutions are
trying their best to not offend China, so we end up with very muddled news
releases.

------
Bootwizard
Does anyone here think it's a bad idea to travel internationally at this time?
I have a trip from US to UK planned in 2 weeks...

~~~
Filligree
In my opinion: The risk is still acceptably low if you're a young, healthy
person, but only if you're able to self-quarantine after the travel and avoid
contact with anyone beyond the age of fifty or who has respiratory problems
for the first month afterwards.

Follow guidelines, but use common sense. If we're in a situation where it's
too risky for certain groups to travel, then it's also risky for travelers to
interact with them.

Also keep in mind that, depending on the situation at the time and they length
of your trip, you might not be able to return. Make sure nothing terrible will
happen in that situation.

~~~
Bootwizard
I am a young and relatively healthy person.

------
xg15
What I don't understand, why are actual tests for the virus being done so
reluctantly?

I'm german and followed the media coverage and initial panic a few weeks ago
when the first case appeared in germany. There was a rush of people who wanted
to get themselves tested - but got turned down with the info that only persons
who are already suspect (show symptoms AND just got back from china) were
eligible for testing.

Now we're realizing that infection paths cannot be tracked anymore and there
is very likely a huge number of unknown infected persons.

If you got a virus that is both asymptomatic and infectious for 14 days,
wouldn't you want to test as many people you can, as early as possible?

------
mc32
So basically “we officially deprecated the designation pandemic and call it an
alphabet soup, but it’s what we used to call a pandemic”.

That makes it so much clearer. I mean are they trying to help people
understand things or not?

------
haunter
Wonder what will happen with the Olympic games. Even a simple delay would be
huge.

~~~
whb07
Corona family viruses are flu season events. The deadly regular flu is a well
known member.

The hope is that come spring-summer it will wane off and provide enough time
for a vaccine to be developed.

So healthy young athletes should be good to go for the summer.

~~~
dharmab
I think the concern is the large crowds of ordinary people using trains,
airplanes, hotels, restaurants and event venues, not the athletes.

------
univalent
Will the summer heat reduce the spread and transmission of the virus? This is
a theory being floated by many of my friends and family in India. Wondering if
its true.

~~~
dcchambers
On the flip side - the cold tends to keep people indoors and away from others.
The warm weather tends to make people go outside and interact with others.

~~~
Ma8ee
On the other hand people interacting indoors are closer to each other and
breath the same air and handle the same things more than people outdoors.

