
Past Time to Tell the Public:It Will Probably Go Pandemic, We Should Prepare Now - aaron695
https://virologydownunder.com/past-time-to-tell-the-public-it-will-probably-go-pandemic-and-we-should-all-prepare-now/
======
dkarl
The article becomes much less edgy if you know what the authorities are
actually saying. For example, the American CDC, in USA Today[1]:

"Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization
and Respiratory Diseases, told reporters Friday that U.S. health officials are
preparing for the coronavirus to become a pandemic."

"'We’re not seeing community spread here in the United States, yet, but it’s
very possible, even likely, that it may eventually happen,” she said. “Our
goal continues to be slowing the introduction of the virus into the U.S. This
buys us more time to prepare communities for more cases and possibly sustained
spread.'"

Sooooo... today's edgy "the media and authorities are keeping us in the dark"
blog post got scooped two days ago by the CDC and USA Today.

[1]
[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/02/21/coronav...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/02/21/coronavirus-
who-contain-outbreak-iran-deaths-south-korea-cases/4829278002/)

~~~
Frost1x
Following a few comments from experts in the field and looking at some of the
data being presented, it's fairly obvious this pandemic case was reasonably
high. There are of course lots of unknowns models used can't account for but
that's no reason to discard the potential risk entirely.

Keep in mind, many of these decisions to avoid "pandemic" talk try to take
most holistic views in regards to public safety/health. There is a lot of
consideration regarding deaths cause by panic actions which are often
estimated/modeled as well and if panic related deaths and side effects are
higher than a current actual threat, it's often viewed that the best course of
action is to suppress panic until warranted.

So lack of pandemic talk doesn't inherently mean there is a legitimate reason
_not to_ panic, just that you're being given limited information. At the same
time you shouldn't assume experts, the media, etc. are somehow mass conspiring
against your health/safety. Assessments are probably reasonable to follow.

The best course of action is to also take a holistic look at situations
independent of these groups and make your own rational assessment of risks and
impact.

If you don't already have some non-perishable food supplies, you should have
completely irrespective of this specific recent viral outbreak--its basic
preparedness for emergencies.

Some basic preparedness (I'm not talking bunkers and 2 year food cache
craziness) are warranted in general for unpredictable disaster cases so these
situations are good reminders for people to check their pantry for food, etc.
just in case something awful was to happen, those supplies can help
significantly.

~~~
peanut_is_yum
Thanks for the tip!

Since I hadn't lived thru anything that threatened my society, I never
believed in stocking up on non-perishables.

However, the fact that I'm living thru a potential pandemic convinces me that
we as a race aren't nearly as resilient as our modern amenities and high QoL
suggest.

~~~
irq11
News you can use: you’re living through _multiple pandemics_ , all the time.

There’s a flu pandemic (several, actually), that are far more immediately
threatening to you than this virus. Society has not yet fallen.

~~~
jopsen
Does this have a very different fatality rate that the flu does?

Also many at-risk patients are vaccinated against the flu.

Besides, even if you are likely to survive and all, it's still wise to plan
for everybody else to panic ;)

~~~
irq11
The fatality rate is on par with the flu, except in older patients (over 60)
where it is _currently_ higher.

Ironic that you should bring up flu vaccination...despite the risk of death
from flu being the average person’s greater concern (by far), we still have to
beg people to get vaccinated, and the rates are low.

I’d wager that most of the folks fear-mongering about covid-19 on this thread
haven’t had a flu shot this year.

~~~
senordevnyc
This is absolutely false. You’re comparing the coronavirus fatality rate for
young and healthy people to the _overall_ flu fatality rate. Try comparing the
fatality rate of 20-40 year olds only between each virus and then get back to
us on how they’re comparable.

Also, I’m kind of horrified at how indifferent you are across many comments to
the prospect of tens of millions of elderly and sick people dying. Just
because you’re young and healthy, no one should be very concerned about this?

~~~
irq11
According to the most recent paper from CCDC, under age 40, the current
estimate of fatality rate is 0.4%. Between 50-59, 1.3%.

For those with no pre-existing medical conditions, 0.9%:

[http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/e53946e2-c6c4-41e9-9...](http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/e53946e2-c6c4-41e9-9a9b-fea8db1a8f51)

Death rates for flu vary widely by age, race and location, but these numbers
are not out of the ordinary for influenza.

I’m not “indifferent”, I’m calmly assessing relative risks. You, on the other
hand, are simply spreading FUD. Go breathe into a bag.

~~~
senordevnyc
Fatality rate in US for 18-49 is 0.02%. Source:

[https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2017-2018.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2017-2018.htm)

So using your most optimistic number of 0.4%, that’s a fatality rate 20x as
high.

And again, you have many comments downplaying the significance of this virus
based on your own assessment that it kills young and healthy people at
acceptably low rates. What about the billions of people who are older, sick,
or have the misfortune of being born in a country without access to decent
medical care? Pretty easy to calmly assess relative risks to _other_ people,
especially if you get them wrong by a factor of 2000%.

~~~
irq11
I am concerned about other people. It has no bearing on my advice to you,
which is that unless you are old or sick, you should stop posting
misinformation to HN, and go breathe into a bag in a dim room.

Maybe play some relaxing music and light a candle. (Be careful, though: you’re
many hundreds of times more likely to start a fire with the candle than die
from covid!)

------
johnwheeler
Before you propagate this information and take action, read this post about
the psychology of fear mongering, and ask yourself if you identify with it.

1\. Do you tend to mistrust authority?

2\. Do you feel powerless to control the course of your life?

3\. Do you feel like you have special information and insight the rest of us
do not?

4\. Do you feel comfort when thinking about the end of the world because once
it happens, you will be prepared and validated?

[https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/psychology...](https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/psychology-
reveals-the-comforts-of-the-apocalypse/)

~~~
klagermkii
This seems to just be a set of general steps for the dominant culture to
downplay dissenters or individuals for whom the system isn't working. It
doesn't tell you anything about if the system is actually working or not, or
if those individuals are right or wrong. Anyone who disagrees with the system
will probably go through similar feelings (maybe not point 4).

You could put yourself in the position of someone who grew up poor and
disillusioned as part of a visible minority in a US city, or a Hong Kong
protestor, or almost any other anti-hedgemony protestor and they'd check the
first three boxes. Are they wrong or is the system wrong? Nothing in this list
helps determine that.

~~~
throwlaplace
Astute observation. 1 and 2 apply to marginalized communities but 3 and 4 do
not.

~~~
klagermkii
I think you see point 3 come through in the discussions talking about
privilege and lived experience.

It's a natural step after point 1 or 2 where the dominant group rebuts with
"well it works for me, so it should work for you", and the minority group
provides their theories as to what results in them having a different outcome.

~~~
throwlaplace
>I think you see point 3 come through in the discussions talking about
privilege and lived experience.

That's not the kind secret information preppers and conspiracy theorists lay
claim to

------
PragmaticPulp
The premise of this article is that we should essentially press the “panic
button” now, to get people through the shock of preparing for a pandemic while
we know it’s safe to do so.

> Suggesting things people can do to prepare for a possible hard time to come
> doesn’t just get them better prepared logistically. It also helps get them
> better prepared emotionally. It helps get them through the Oh My God (OMG)
> moment everyone needs to have, and needs to get through, preferably without
> being accused of hysteria.

> It is better to get through this OMG moment now rather than later.

The preparedness tips in the article are generic enough, but worth skimming.
Basically:

\- Get extra prescription medicine now if you might need it

\- A couple months of non-perishable food storage is a good idea

\- Practice band washing and avoid touching your face.

\- Cross train employees at work to minimize the impact of absences.

~~~
arkades
> \- Get extra prescription medicine now if you might need it

I hate this advice. It's not "wrong," in the sense that technically it would
be a good thing to do, but it's also so wrong that it transcends categories of
right and wrong.

Your refill schedule will not allow you to get extra prescription meds early.
And if it did, your insurance wouldn't pay for it - which means paying sticker
price, which means ... well, depends on the med, right? I used to take an
antacid that had a sticker price of about 800/mo.

For almost anyone, "stock up on an extra month of prescription meds" isn't a
thing. It's just not a choice. For it to /be/ a thing, someone actually needs
to write a law stating something like "once per calendar year, a physician can
write an extra parallel prescription for a supply of medications not exceeding
three months, and insurers must pay for it," or somesuch.

Until that happens, I don't even know what to /do/ with that kind of "advice."

~~~
dangrossman
> Until that happens, I don't even know what to /do/ with that kind of
> "advice."

My wife asked once, and was told that 3 month supply prescriptions are common
for people that use mail order pharmacies, and was happy to write one.
Insurance covered it too, since the refill schedule was every 3 months -- it
comes out to the same cost in the end.

~~~
thewebcount
Again, that depends on the med. Your monthly allergy prescription? Sure! Your
oxy Rx? No way. My spouse and I are on some meds (not oxy) that they
absolutely would not refill for 3 months at a time. My other meds do come in 3
month prescriptions from a mail order pharmacy.

~~~
dx87
Yep, I'm on a medication that is commonly abused so they only allow 30 day
prescriptions, and you can't pay with cash, it has to go through insurance.

~~~
RandomBacon
I imagine such medications must be very important to take as prescribed, but
the only other option I can think of is one day out of every two/three/four
weeks, take less of it so that you can save it and slowly stockpile it.

~~~
dx87
It's an ADHD medication, so there's no health risk associated with not taking
it, they're just really strict about the amount given out at once because they
don't want people getting a 90 day supply and selling it. Sometimes I won't
take it on weekends to keep some extra just in case I might not be able to get
a prescription filled on time due to no doctor appointments being available,
or the pharmacies being out of stock for a few days.

------
DevX101
This is one case where it's worth overreacting to. Biological epidemics are
the only thing that has had the capacity to kill >50 million people in a year.
In my risk classification hierarchy I put pandemics above nuclear war and
wayyyy above terrorism. Yet we've spent trillions on the war on terror the
past 20 years while there's no coordinated plan in the U.S. for this yet. If
there's even a 2% chance of this going pandemic in the U.S. we should be
allocating at least a billion with apolitical expert driven policy
implementations to prevent spread.

My jaw dropped when I read that the State Dept allowed infected Americans to
fly with uninfected persons to the U.S. from Japan against the express
recommendations of the CDC. This is what we're dealing with and I'm not
optimistic.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
The plans the US already has for a flu pandemic should mostly carry over, no?
COVID is probably worse than the seasonal flu, but it's not outside the
reasonable range of what a flu pandemic could do.

~~~
platz
Do 29 year old doctors typically die from the flu?

~~~
jacquesm
Typically not. But that's not how this stuff works. It is bell curves all the
way. So your old, very young and vulnerable people will make up the bulk of
those that die but there will be plenty of regular people in the prime of
their life that will die as well.

~~~
tomohawk
The 1918 flu particularly affected 20-40 year old healthy people.

[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-did-1918-flu-
kill...](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-did-1918-flu-kill-so-many-
otherwise-healthy-young-adults-180967178/)

~~~
jacquesm
That was an anomaly in many other ways too. Keep in mind that a good chunk of
the world was still recovering from WWI. Being exposed to some other disease
earlier in life can give a similar effect to vaccination.

This is one of the reasons why HIV spread was not as bad as it could have been
in Western Europe where exposure to a disease still gave some benefits many
centuries later:

[https://www.nature.com/news/2005/050307/full/news050307-15.h...](https://www.nature.com/news/2005/050307/full/news050307-15.html)

------
jpm_sd
There is a lot of panicky misinformation out there, the WHO is calling it an
"infodemic"!

This Wikipedia article is doing a respectable job tracking some of the
conspiracy theories and falsehoods:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation_related_to_the_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation_related_to_the_2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_outbreak)

Wikipedia also has a good summary of the overall state of things:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_ou...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_outbreak)

~~~
jacquesm
The way outlets such as The New York Post deal with this is absolutely
irresponsible. They keep on re-posting total garbage that has been debunked
multiple times and Google isn't helping by linking to it.

This is also worth keeping an eye on:

[https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/locations-
confirme...](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/locations-confirmed-
cases.html#map)

~~~
timbit42
Perhaps they should be sued.

~~~
jacquesm
It's owned by Murdoch and faithfully trumpets the party line:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post#Influence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post#Influence)

Good luck suing them.

------
leesec
[https://www.ready.gov/pandemic](https://www.ready.gov/pandemic)

Basic things the US gov recommends in the case of a pandemic.

I personally went out and got 2 weeks of supplies last night.

~~~
animalnewbie
> 2 weeks

What a noob

Seriouslu though, if it strikes it'd be at least for a few months.

~~~
leesec
I don't think the idea is to be sustainable for 2 weeks, it's to mitigate the
stress on the supply line by staggering demand.

------
contemporary343
The lack of testing and testing capacity in the US is deeply alarming. They’ve
only run 500 tests so far and criteria still require the patient to have
recently traveled from Hubei! By comparison South Korea is running thousands
of tests per day, which is why it is picking up so many cases. Absolutely
unforgivable complacency and lack of transparency from CDC.

There is almost certainly community spreading in the US that is going
undetected.

Once local cases finally start getting reported and tested in the US, there
will be panic and a lot of the same irrational hoarding behavior and shortages
observed elsewhere. It would be better if the CDC mentally prepared and
educated the public for what is to come. Normalcy bias is very real, and
people here are still culturally not ready for this reality..

Edit: Some background for the above comments:

Epidemiologist at Harvard/ Brigham and Women’s responsible for virology
testing there:
[https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/status/12315038051598131...](https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/status/1231503805159813121)

“Reminder: As of today (Feb 23), the US remains extremely limited in #COVID19
testing. Only 3 of ~100 public health labs have @CDC test kits working and CDC
is not sharing what went wrong with the kits. How to know if COVID19 is
spreading here if we are not looking for it.”

“Now >10 days since CDC recalled kits w still no explanation for failure.
Failure to share what went wrong hinders progress by all labs nationwide.
Expeditious sharing of information is a must during epidemics. We say this to
China and CDC should practice as well.”

“Without more information, public health labs & well resourced hospital labs
setting up CDC published assay in-house are held at complete standstill,
unable to prepare for what will inevitably be concern for local transmission.”

“Without rapid diagnostics ready to go, healthcare infrastructure may become
rapidly inundated, even if cases turn out all negative - an abundance of
caution will require quarantines until test rules out a case. Any backlog can
quickly hamper hospitals.”

“Additionally, recommendations for testing continue to tie in to recent travel
to China or some contact. With cases in at least 28 countries, and local
transmission increasing, testing and surveillance nationally must move
forward”

“We cannot know if there is coronavirus here in US if we are not testing. We
must get the US up to speed for diagnostics and we need expeditious
information sharing from @CDC to the lab testing community here and abroad.”

~~~
PragmaticPulp
Do you have a source for this analysis? Or for the numbers?

Generally, the CDC is quite good at their jobs. If you think they’re shrugging
their shoulders right now and being lazy or complacent about something, you’ve
probably misunderstood part of the story.

It’s virtually tradition for Internet comment sections to fill with
overconfident armchair experts who claim to know better than the professionals
as well as the general public in these cases of outbreak. The arguments
usually hinge on one or two “gotcha” statistics that they think are evidence
of a larger problem. IMO, it’s not helpful. Let’s focus on actionable tips
like this article instead of armchair criticisms of professionals based on
unsourced information.

~~~
contemporary343
There has been concern on this point from epidemiologists and public health
professionals for some time:

Director of Johns Hopkins School of public health, health security program:
[https://twitter.com/t_inglesby/status/1231363420907343873](https://twitter.com/t_inglesby/status/1231363420907343873)

Dean of Nebraska’s college of public health:
[https://twitter.com/unmc_drkhan/status/1231284337435381761](https://twitter.com/unmc_drkhan/status/1231284337435381761)

Sentinel testing of ILIs (influenza like illnesses testing negative for the
flu) in major metros was to have begun at least a week ago. But now delayed
for some unknown period of time due to reagent failure on the PCR test kits.

For further context, BC in Canada has alone managed to run more tests than the
entire US as currently reported. We have 60x the population and more travelers
from the source region in the key Dec/Jan time frame. If we wait till the
severe ARDS cases show up like in Iran and Italy it’s already out in the
community and causes unnecessary panic.

As the person in charge of viral testing at Brigham and Women’s / Harvard med
just tweeted today: “ Reminder: As of today (Feb 23), the US remains extremely
limited in #COVID19 testing. Only 3 of ~100 public health labs have @CDC test
kits working and CDC is not sharing what went wrong with the kits. How to know
if COVID19 is spreading here if we are not looking for it.”

“ Now >10 days since CDC recalled kits w still no explanation for failure.
Failure to share what went wrong hinders progress by all labs nationwide.
Expeditious sharing of information is a must during epidemics. We say this to
China and CDC should practice as well.”

“As someone responsible for overseeing virology diagnostics at our hospital
@harvardmed @BrighamWomens - the need for clarity and quick turnaround is
paramount to keep the hospital running smoothly in event of local
transmission. So far, process from CDC leaves much to be desired”

[https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/status/12315038051598131...](https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/status/1231503805159813121)

------
joak
In the preparation list, scaling ICU is most needed.

A lot of people survived thank to intensive care units. There might not be
enough to cope with the peak

~~~
jacquesm
That 'might' is probably safely replace with 'are'. No country - even the
richest - is prepared to deal with this many ICU cases. For instance in the UK
(which has a very good healthcare system) there are about 6k ICU beds on a
population of ~65 million.

And then there is the risk of having ICU personnel become infected themselves.
This is not a trivial challenge.

~~~
throwaway5752
In this case, I guess we have to just trust the people that go through the
most competitive and intellectually demanding decade of school and
professional training on the planet. They have the benefit of being on the
front lines themselves, with the lives of themselves and their coworkers at
risk.

edit: if it helps avoid distractions, let me say it is obviously not a
"benefit" and medical professionals are underappreciated heroes. They deal
with infections disease every day, sometimes far more dangerous than covid-19.
For them, the danger and planning isn't hypothetical like it is for a vast
majority of the commenters here. I trust the medical community to plan for
this appropriately more that I trust any other group of professionals.

~~~
jacquesm
That's not a benefit. And given that these people will try to do their jobs
even when under=equipped and understaffed they are paid too little to begin
with.

------
bpfrh
There is a video which compares that to other causes of deaths and other
"pandemics":

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dDD2tHWWnU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dDD2tHWWnU)

Please stop threating the virus as if we would all die.

The things you have in the article should be the things you should do anyway:

-No touching your face, is something you should stop anyway, as the flu will also kill you if you have bad luck and it is the same problem

-Having certain things prepared in case there is a local emergency is a good idea anyway, but the recommandation at least in austria is about 10-14 days, so I hope most of the people already have that.

-Supply chains won't break down because of such a virus, just as it didn't because of the swineflu and other things.

-If supply chains break down, we have more than the coronavirus to worry about.

edit:

Pressed submit to soon

~~~
jacquesm
No, we won't all die. But the impact will be substantial if the infections are
not brought under control.

Just like not everybody dies from many other diseases such as the flu. The
difference here is that it also hits hard on otherwise healthy people and that
healthcare workers are very much exposed to infection. If that front line does
not hold it can get worse rapidly.

Western countries with good medicine and infrastructure in place stand a
chance of riding this out with just (possibly substantial) economic impact.
Poor countries are in for a rough ride. Check out what is happening in Iran
right now (which your linked video conveniently leaves out, possibly because
it does not fit their narrative).

Mortality rates around 2-5% for a pandemic are nothing to sneeze at, infection
rates in close proximity are very high making it hard to care for those that
are showing symptoms and put high density population centers at serious risk.

~~~
bpfrh
You can't controll infections.

You can try to fasttrack vaccinies, but you can't really stop a virus with
such a transmission way from spreading.

That is a problem but it is nothing new.

Every few years we will have new diseases and unfortunately they will spread
and kill people.

The flu does that yearly.

Does that suck? Yes

Will it mean the end of the world or have a high impact on countries that have
a robust healtcare system? No

~~~
jacquesm
> You can't controll infections.

No, but you can try to slow down the rate of infection to avoid overloading
the healthcare system.

> You can try to fasttrack vaccinies, but you can't really stop a virus with
> such a transmission way from spreading.

Agreed.

> That is a problem but it is nothing new.

It certainly isn't anything new. But if the past is a guide here than the
impact can be substantial.

> Every few years we will have new diseases and unfortunately they will spread
> and kill people.

We do. But most of those do not have this combined potential of spreading
a-symptomatic; long incubation time and relatively high mortality. That makes
this one more serious than for instance SARS and MERS, the impact of which was
already substantial.

> The flu does that yearly.

If you want to compare what is happening now to the seasonal flu then you are
probably not equipped to evaluate the risks. The flu predominantly affects
those that are already weakened and it tends to kill people who would have
been dead soon anyway. This virus is _nothing_ like that.

> Will it mean the end of the world or have a high impact on countries that
> have a robust healtcare system? No

It won't mean the end of the world but it likely _will_ have high impact on
countries with robust healthcare systems because (1) the economies of those
countries depend on everybody being free to move around and interact with each
other, something which anti-spreading measures will affect and (2) even the
most wealthy countries with robust healthcare systems have limited healthcare
capacity, typically on the order of 1 ICU bed per 10000 people. Assuming you
can staff them.

------
jacquesm
I think the WHO not declaring a pandemic is mostly wishful thinking on their
part, the longer they wait the bigger the impact to the system. There are now
30 countries with known infections, a large number with likely undetected
cases due to lack of local infrastructure. Impact to the economy and general
panic are on the one side of the scale, there is still only a very small
chance that they will be able to contain this.

------
nednar
Well. Infection rate is going down already. Death rate is starting to slow
down. Death rate was never higher than a common flu. Healing rate is
increasing drastically, many heal without medical needs.

So, should we really talk about a pandemic? A flu pandemic? Or has the virus
changed in the last few days and I've missed it?

~~~
jacquesm
Infection rate in China is going down and the way they keep changing their
criteria makes it hard to find continuity in the numbers. Elsewhere it is
still rising.

~~~
nednar
Actually the changes in China are the reason why the number increased from
40k+ to 60k+ wasn't it?

~~~
jacquesm
That caused the jump. But those cases were there all along, just not reported.
Now they have - again - changed the criteria and made them more stringent
resulting in an apparent drop in the number of cases.

------
swsieber
To those commenting about infection rate going down:

Do you take into account that China relaxed the requirements for diagnosing a
case many days ago, and then made them strict again a couple of days ago?
That's one sucky move that makes thing seem like they're slowing down. Or so
you just look at graph and think everything is fine? Or is everything actually
improving even taking the reporting changes into account?

~~~
thenaturalist
Got any sources for these claims?

~~~
swsieber
It's well documented in various day to day coverage feeds. The one I'm
thinking about is CNN. I'm pretty sure its public information disseminated by
China.

Edit:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainland_China_during_the_20...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainland_China_during_the_2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_outbreak)

------
sbussard
[https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/related-
stig...](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/related-stigma.html)

------
pyk
Recommendations for what individuals can do are buried but very practical:

* Try to get a few extra months’ worth of prescription meds, if possible.

* Think through now how we will take care of sick family members while trying not to get infected. Cross-train key staff at work so one person’s absence won’t derail our organization’s ability to function.

* Practice touching our faces less. So how about a face-counter app like the step-counters so many of us use?

* Replace handshakes with elbow-bumps (the “Ebola handshake”).

* Start building harm-reduction habits like pushing elevator buttons with a knuckle instead of a fingertip.

~~~
popotamonga
Is hand saniziter any good, for when you touched the wrong places?

~~~
dredmorbius
Yes. Alcohol is sufficient, antibiotic treatments are useless against viruses.

Wet wipes may also be convenient.

------
asdfasgasdgasdg
We will see. The graphs of numbers of confirmed infected all seem to be
bending down, but of course there's the possibility of biases like unreleased
numbers and incomplete testing. I guess we will know in a few weeks which
direction it is going to go.

That being said, with death being so rare among the young, I don't see why
most people should panic more than they do about flu season. Obviously it is a
serious concern, but I think on the extremes there is a bit more alarmism than
is warranted. Of course, those same sensational articles are going to be the
ones that get upvoted on social media sites like this one. I remember when the
avian influenza scare was on how many end of the world articles there were.
Not that it wasn't a pressing concern but it seems like these types of
situations capture the public's imagination and fears a little more than is
justified by the facts on the ground.

Also keep in mind that this message is coming from a "risk communication
expert" who probably gets more exposure and therefore more business the more
extreme their predictions are. Are they actually privy to any information or
knowledge the other experts aren't aware of? Do they have any skin in the game
at all when they make this prediction? Consider the source is all I'm saying.

~~~
coconut_crab
> That being said, with death being so rare among the young, I don't see why
> most people should panic more than they do about flu season.

This is my thoughts why Covid-19 is much more dangerous than seasonal flu:
first it is much more virulent, and hard to detect, many of the infections in
Korea were due to one 61 years old woman alone. Secondly the mortality rate is
higher too, estimated at 2-3%, with the serious cases at around 10% (please
correct me if I am wrong). Those two above combined means if left unchecked,
Covid-19 can easily overload our medical system, as what is happening in
Wuhan*. So I will most likely won't perish or suffer any long term health
problems from Covid-19, but our society as a whole might be devastated if we
can't contain it. There is no need to succumb to irrational fear (like what's
happening some countries), but we should all be prepared.

Actually I am worried about Iran, the embargo from America means their medical
system are lacking all essentials. That's why they have so many deaths, second
only yo China.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
The mortality rate for hospitalized flu patients in the US is about 10%.
Mortality rates of categories like "serious cases" depend on a bunch of
arbitrary and unverifiable assumptions, so I don't think this proves the
coronavirus is bad or isn't bad, but 10% isn't as high of a number as I think
you're intuitively expecting.

~~~
empath75
The mortality rate for hospitalized corona virus patients is closer to 50%

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
Source? That doesn't match anything I've seen.

------
7532yahoogmail
This article does not read like cogent CDC advice. It seems written in a more
page-6 OP-ED style. Not sure this is the perspective we need.

------
velcro
At the risk of going full doomsday mode (and besides stockpiling on food and
masks) - lets say pandemic happens and some useful meds/vitamins do go out of
stock - is there any advice what those are i.e. what kind of meds/vitamins
would be practical to buy right now to help fight/slow COVID-19/infection in
the future?

~~~
iforgotpassword
No, just food and meds for fever. I'm actually concerned there will be a
shortage of food just because everybody is stocking up at a sudden panic, not
necessarily because we actually end up with a huge pandemic (which might or
might not happen at a later point in time). So for the first time in my life
I'm thinking about actually doing this.

------
aazaa
> ... In most countries ... ordinary citizens have not been asked to prepare.
> Instead, they have been led to expect that their governments will keep the
> virus from their doors.

This will be a painful but necessary shift. Realizing there's no way to stop
the spread of coronavirus from "over there" to "over here," the best move
individuals and groups can take is to forego large gatherings:

> ... the switch to measures like canceling mass events designed to keep us
> from infecting each other.

How long this will take is anybody's guess. But any organization still
planning a conference of more than a few dozen people should really stop and
consider the wisdom of that plan at this point.

------
asciimike
Fear-mongering aside, the article basically says "have some masks and be
prepared for supply disruptions of critical things (medicine in particular)"
which seems like generally a good idea? Maybe that's just the Boy Scout "be
prepared" in me, but that feels like a low cost way to insulate yourself from
the unexpected (pandemic or otherwise).

I really enjoy "Doomsday prepping for less crazy folk", where this is
discussed:
[http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/prep/#4.7](http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/prep/#4.7)

------
AndrewKemendo
Sounds like the word "Pandemic" is getting the "AI" treatment: A lot of people
have heard of it in the movies, the movies make it seem like if this word
applies to your situation is an end of times scenario and people should be
panicking and worrying.

I don't think that's what the CDC and others want to get across. Much like
(most) AI researchers and partitioners trying to downplay the fear mongering.

As a species we really seem to love Existential crises.

------
hu3
This might sound tasteless but...

What's the probable impact of such pandemy on the stock market?

Any low hanging fruit to invest on? Any category of assets to stay away from?

~~~
jacquesm
Travel stocks and travel related stocks down, health related stocks up would
be my first guess.

~~~
iooi
Not health insurance though, they could be in for massive liabilities should a
lot of people start contracting.

~~~
jacquesm
Correct, I was thinking of Pharmaceuticals, should have been more precise.

------
rglover
For those uncertain of how to treat this information, these are the razors
I've used on myself the past few weeks:

[https://youtu.be/pqzcCfUglws?t=368](https://youtu.be/pqzcCfUglws?t=368)
[https://youtu.be/pqzcCfUglws?t=1382](https://youtu.be/pqzcCfUglws?t=1382)

------
anonsivalley652
PSA: spreading FUD and panic isn't helping anyone. The common flu is a
"pandemic" every year, so should we freak out and buy 1000 kg of wheat while
inconsistently not having any means of food production? Don't act out of fear;
act out of reason, honesty and proportionality.

~~~
jopsen
To be fair the common flu has a fatality rate around 0.01%, sars-cov-2 is
around 2%.

(Not sure there is much we can do in the long run though)

~~~
dom96
Does it though? COVID-19 may actually have a much lower fatality rate as we
are only getting reports of people that get symptoms, maybe that's only 10% of
infections, maybe even less.

~~~
jopsen
Indeed, it could also be higher..

Wishful thinking doesn't really make it so :) (Even though I really wish it
did)

Whether it matters in practice I don't know.. how much can we really do ?

------
m3kw9
The WHO knows this and the pandamic button is also a early signal, they don’t
press it when is “too late”. They have protocol and procedures after they
declare it, and doing it too early will probably mess it up and cause
confusion. This guy is living in his own world.

------
pmoriarty
Earlier in the week I went to large university library. There were at least 5
people there severely coughing. Everyone else was sitting around like it was
perfectly natural, no masks, no attempts at containment or isolation.

Yes, we're in cold and flu season, so it could be just ordinary cold and flu
(which is bad enough, as the flu kills lots of people as is, so spreading it
is irresponsible at best), but the US is hardly doing any testing, so for all
we know it could also be COVID-19.

The amount of complacency around the US right now is stunning. People are just
burying their heads in the sand and acting like it couldn't happen to them,
relying on the media or government to tell them when to take it seriously, and
both the mainstream media and the government flat failing to get people to
prepare or take any measures to slow down the spread of this disease apart
from telling them to wash their hands.

The numbers coming out of China are not reliable, but given the numbers we do
have (including non-China cases) it seems COVID-19 (aka SARS2) is far worse
than the regular flu (for which at least we have a vaccine, though not nearly
enough people take it).

We should be doing everything we can to slow the spread of this disease, to
buy some time for medicine to study it and come up with treatments, but
instead outside of countries that are already obviously seriously affected
people are acting like it doesn't exist.

That kind of complacency provides the perfect breeding ground for this
disease.

For those of you who want to keep a closer watch on what's going on, see:

[https://old.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/](https://old.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/)
(more lax moderation)

[https://old.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/](https://old.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/)
(more strict moderation)

[https://old.reddit.com/r/COVID19/](https://old.reddit.com/r/COVID19/)
(science-oriented news and discussion)

------
RobertRoberts
Give me the numbers.

People panic over everything imaginable. The only defense is logic. (which
unfortunately is only a slow and long term defense)

At this point I feel I am more likely to win the lottery and get struck my
lightning twice before I get this virus. And even then, what is the death rate
for healthy adults?

It's amazing how easily people freak out these days.

~~~
jacquesm
At this point, yes. But that's not the way to look at this. The way to look at
this is what will happen over the next couple of weeks/months and to what
degree we can avoid community spreading once the virus achieves a foothold,
which - sorry - at this point is mostly a matter of time.

Containment can be done early on and if done effectively can get you back into
your 'no need to worry' mode. But once containment has failed you are in
different territory and will have to play a much more complex game with more
substantial impact.

So your present day chances of contracting this in the next 24 hours are
looking pretty good but your chances of contracting this in the next couple of
months are substantially better than winning the lottery or getting struck by
lightning even once. Unless you live the life of a hermit.

A vaccine would be quite handy, but we do not have one - yet , though that
race is on - and even if we had it you still need to make it in quantity to be
effective. A virus doesn't particularly care about whether you are able to
think logically or not. It cares about contact between people and not killing
its host too quickly. That way it improves its chances of spreading its
genetic code.

~~~
RobertRoberts
There is a lot I can do for my family and friends about helping them not be
_irrationally_ afraid.

Eliminating irrational fear is valuable. Spreading undue panic is
reprehensible.

What are the numbers? What is the risk equation? If we avoid these, then we
are not speaking from knowledge but simply guessing and editorializing. Which
tends towards panic, not rationality.

~~~
jacquesm
Eliminating irrational fear is very valuable. But there is also something to
be said for being _rationally_ afraid: to try to put boundaries on how scary
this thing really is and what the likely impact will be.

Undue panic is 'we are all going to die, the end is neigh' kind of bs.

But a measured response could easily be that it would be better to reduce
travel if you do not really have to, avoid concentrations of people and so on.

The numbers that we know so far are impressive enough that I believe those
measures are warranted. 1-2% mortality, aerosolized infection confirmed,
tactile infection confirmed, reasonably long incubation time, tests appear
unreliable, virus now present in 25+ countries, with serious outbreaks in
several of those. This is no longer in 'common flu' territory, nor is it in
'black plague' territory. Let's hope it stays that way and can be pushed back
into the bottle again or that a vaccine is developed fast enough and produced
in quantity enough that the bulk effects can be reduced.

------
est31
> One horrible effect of this continued “stop the pandemic” daydream
> masquerading as a policy goal: It is driving counter-productive and outrage-
> inducing measures by many countries against travelers from other countries,
> even their own citizens back from other countries. But possibly more
> horrible: The messaging is driving resources toward “stopping,” and away
> from the main potential benefit of containment – slowing the spread of the
> pandemic and thereby buying a little more time to prepare for what’s coming.

I don't get this part of the article at all. What's exactly counter-productive
about not allowing civilian travellers from affected provinces? That seems
like the best method to slow the spread to me. The longer we can keep it away
from anybody, the better, because the more time we have to come up with a
vaccine or alternative ways to combat the disease.

It's definitely possible that covid-19 will eventually reach all parts of the
globe, but we should try everything possible to not let it reach those parts
before we have come up with a vaccine.

~~~
bpfrh
Closing borders isn't easy.

Most of the time there are still ways you can cross, so instead of having
known routes where you can test and treat accordingly, you have an unknown
number of people crossing the border on unknown points and spreading the virus
in unknown regions.

~~~
dredmorbius
The point of epidemiological containment is to reduce the R value such that
R<1\. Once this is done, eventually, _inevitably_ , the epidemic will burn
out.

Yes, more people will become infected, yes, some will die.

But the level of person-to-person transmission will have fallen below the
level necessary for the epidemic to sustain itself, and it will slowly decline
and fade out.

Perfect containment, 100% effective vaccines, 100% vaccination rates, (neither
of which apply here: there is not yet a vaccine), 100% travel and contact
curtailment, 100% sanitation, 100% filtration, are not required. Only
_sufficiently effective methods to reduce transmission_.

Of which, strong, effective, and widespread travel restrictions _within or
from epidemic zones_ are a very sensible tool.

~~~
jacquesm
Excellent comment and too bad it is this far down the thread.

------
sabujp
tldr; use "ebola" elbow bumps instead of handshakes, don't touch your face,
there should be an app to count the # of times you touch your face, tell your
friends not to touch their face when they touch their face. Did I mention not
to touch your face?

------
sabujp
what is happening with antivirals, why should these take years in
crisis/pandemic situations? Would govts rather see mass hysteria and huge hit
to economies rather than trying new vaccines?

------
patagonicus
As Hacker News is usually full of people that can provide good advice: What
should I personally do to prepare? I'm living alone and have the ability to
work remotely once the virus starts spreading here.

My guess is mostly stocking up on food, which I've planned to do for a long
time - sounds like a good motivation to finally prepare a list and get
shopping.

Should I bother with a N95 mask? I already have surgical masks that I used
last year when I got a cold, but FWIU they only help protecting others when
you're already sick. I can spare the money for a N95 mask even if I don't end
up using it, but I'm not sure it'll actually help.

Touching your face less and using knuckles to touch buttons as well as washing
your hands more often are things I'm already working on. I guess I'll start
carrying hand sanitizer when leaving the house.

What else can/should I do?

~~~
dis-sys
I have:

1\. n95 masks, e.g. 50 of them. technically, each mask can only last several
hours

2\. UVC light for cleaning up used n95 masks so they can last a few days each

3\. protective eyeglasses if you need to visit hospital for any reason in the
next few months

4\. ethanol (not for your masks)

5\. medical gloves

~~~
ksml
Unless you are doing work that involves lots of tiny particulate matter (and
even if you do), I think 50 n95 masks is pretty darn excessive. Most people
don't even wear them correctly.

------
tapejek
There's a lot of randomness in life

------
greendestiny_re
I loathe these kinds of clickbait headlines with all my being and will not
give them my click under any circumstances. I can only imagine the writer
twisting his/her nipples in expectation of all the extra traffic he/she will
get from Hacker News.

------
scythe
The biggest question to me is: do you _really_ believe there are no cases in
Indonesia? Does that make sense?

Because if there are in fact dozens of people infected in Indonesia, and we
don't know about it, containment is over. Based on the apparent
transmissibility and incubation period, I don't see how to come back from
that.

~~~
zuckluni
it is weird. but anecdotally it seems like tropical climes less hard hit.
India?

low numbers could just be measuring detection ability instead of actual rates.

~~~
jacquesm
There is an aspect with these viruses that is temperature sensitive that makes
them favor colder regions.

------
Ninjak8051
When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and when you're a virus
researcher, every outbreak looks like a pandemic. The facts on the ground
don't match the pandemic conclusion. There were two cases in all of Santa
Clara County a few weeks ago, now there is one case.

~~~
carapace
Got a link for that?

~~~
Ninjak8051
[https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/DiseaseInformation/novel-
co...](https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/DiseaseInformation/novel-
coronavirus/Pages/home.aspx)

~~~
carapace
Cheers!

