Yup!

I don't think any country will be able to prevent the epidemic spreading through their population. They might be able to slow it. But they don't want to shut their borders, which is what they will need to do. — Punshhh

The spread in China seems to be slowing down, which may be a sign that the preventative measures are having an effect. Granted, no european country is likely to enact similarly draconic measures, but everyone is now warned in advance. In that sense, the somewhat hysterical media reporting might end up being helpful, slowing the spread significantly.

which may be a sign that the preventative measures are having an effect — Echarmion

What about the cases that cropped up with no known connection to infected population. In far away places. Italy, the USA even. The virus may be spreading also outside of human-to-human contact.

This may be scary, but the fatality rate is only two percent. That is very low. We are panicing for no known reason.

To wit, the nationalistic, populist, bigoted Hungary has had no discovered cases of the disease yet.

What about the cases that cropped up with no known connection to infected population. In far away places. Italy, the USA even. The virus may be spreading also outside of human-to-human contact. — god must be atheist

I think the most likely explanation is that people with very light symptoms didn't realize they had anything other than a common cold and traveled.

That's another thing to consider concerning both the confirmed cases and the mortality. A lot of people may have had only very light symptoms that went away on their own. That makes the virus a lot harder to contain, but at the same time might mean the mortality is lower.

In that sense, the somewhat hysterical media reporting might end up being helpful, slowing the spread significantly

I don't see it as hysterical ( that may be the media I watch), the hysteria spreads readily. I live a long way from the nearest case of the virus and already I find myself modifying my behaviour, I was in my local supermarket today and people were clearly panic buying (discretely), including myself. And this in a country of 66 million and only 23 confirmed cases. Basic food stuffs had nearly sold out. Imagine what it will be like when there are a few thousand, or hundred thousand cases.

I'm preparing for the point where the country is locked down and we are all told to stay home for a few weeks, or months. I know it is not certain that this will happen, but better to be prepared.

It will soon have a foothold in many countries without the adequate resources to prevent it becoming endemic. This means that in future travel will have to be severely limited, if we are to keep some countries free of the virus. Also we don't know how effective any vaccines are going to be.

I don't know if you realize the pun you uttered.

I still don't, where is it?

This may be scary, but the fatality rate is only two percent. That is very low. We are panicking for no known reason. — god must be atheist

But there are far more cases than with SARS and MERS. The Corona death toll is now more than those two combined.

I don't see it as hysterical ( that may be the media I watch), the hysteria spreads readily. I live a long way from the nearest case of the virus and already I find myself modifying my behaviour, I was in my local supermarket today and people were clearly panic buying (discretely), including myself. And this in a country of 66 million and only 23 confirmed cases. Basic food stuffs had nearly sold out. Imagine what it will be like when there are a few thousand, or hundred thousand cases. — Punshhh

I think the big question is how much modification of behavior is warranted. There are a bunch of fairly simple methods which are effective at reducing the virus's spread. As long as people who have symptoms and are in an area where the virus is already known limit their contact with other people as much as possible and everyone else follows strict hygiene, it will probably remain manageable.

Limited prevention measures are also easier to keep up long term. If it takes until the end of the year for an effective vaccine to be developed, we'll probably have to deal with repeated waves of the virus as it keeps being re-introduced into areas. A complete shutdown isn't feasible for such a scenario.

↪god must be atheist
I don't know if you realize the pun you uttered.
I still don't, where is it? — Punshhh

You used the expression "decadence" for the soft, rotting core of society, which has become soft and you know, soft, like soft, yellow shit.

But "decadence" actually means in its original sense, in French, "Death, dying, the dying process".

But there are far more cases than with SARS and MERS. The Corona death toll is now more than those two combined. — Monitor

That is true. But the death rate is still only two percent. It can stay two percent until two percent of all infected people die. It's still two percent. The absolute number of deaths grow while it remains at two percent of all infected people as the population of infected people grow.

I don't know what is so hard to understand about "two percent". Must be the effect of North American Populist Stupid Fundamentalist Evangelist Christian Schoolboards' stupid decision to not teach anything useful in school.

I don't know what is so hard to understand about "two percent". — god must be atheist

Nothing hard about it. But you were talking about panic. Two percent or twenty can be the same deaths depending on sample size of those infected. It's the total deaths that people might panic about.

This may be scary, but the fatality rate is only two percent. That is very low. We are panicking for no known reason. — god must be atheist

Two percent isn't low. I'd say flu's 0.1% is low.

Two percent isn't low. I'd say flu's 0.1% is low. — Michael

Well, at the risk of sounding like an uncaring ass, I just want to defend @god must be atheist's point for a bit (correct if me if what I am saying has nothing to do with your point).

If 2% of the population of every country on earth died TOMORROW following the pattern of coronavirus deaths...it seems it would slightly HELP the world's economy (per capita)? Please correct me where wrong (I am interested, and open to the idea that I am very wrong here). It seems most of the 2% will be retired people. So it is just the sadness, trauma, and FEAR that will truly be a problem. FEAR will lead to shutting down of boarders or people not going to work. If the world economy significantly slows, far more than 2% will die as a result over the coming decades.

Two percent isn't low. I'd say flu's 0.1% is low. — Michael

I accept your answer as your opinion. Since we have not established any metrics as to what constitues low, I have no choice to accept your answer as true for you, and you have no choice but to accept that for me two percent is low.

Once we get into other discussions, such as how high a mortality rate affects the economy, education, law, (such as riots starting) and distribution of everyday necessaries, as well as spiritual upheaval, etc etc then we can talk about it more intelligently.

But two percent is not high in my esteem, as the world doubles its population every 40 years, so it is near an annual two-percent increase year-over-year. It hasn't hurt the economy, so a reduction of the same rate ought not hurt the economy either.

Why do you say it's not low? To me 50% would be high, and 80% would be high. Two percent is pittance, compared to 50% and 89%.

it seems it would slightly HELP the world's economy (per capita)? Please correct me where wrong (I am interested, and open to the idea that I am very wrong here). It seems most of the 2% will be retired people. So it is just the sadness, trauma, and FEAR that will truly be a problem. FEAR — ZhouBoTong

I both agree and don't. There will be more mullah and goods to go around per capita; a 2% increase in a flash. The upfall is also that retired, i.e. conventionally and economically non-contributing members go out; that way the production is at a steady rate, and relative wealth will grow.

It is true that fear may induce public panic. Stores will be ransacked. No food available. Farmers refuse to truck their stuff to town. Massive starvation, manier people die from malnutrition, than from New Coronavirus. STealing, and eating other people's loved pets becomes a fashion, and cannibalism is not out either, if things get really bad.

The funeral home industry will strive. So will the doomsday prophet industry. Doomsday prophets and street preachers have been industriously preaching the end of the world, I think since the world began.

I'm getting hungry just re-reading what I've so far written. Cheers, off to the kitchen.

Two percent or twenty can be the same deaths depending on sample size of those infected. — Monitor

Ay-vey.

But "decadence" actually means in its original sense, in French, "Death, dying, the dying process".

Thanks, I get it now. There was a part of me thinking something along those lines.

Regarding the 2%, I agree with your view that it is a low mortality rate. The problem is that in our modern societies allowing 2% of the population to die without trying to prevent it is anathema. So we will commit economic hari kari and probably still loose 2%.

. The problem is that in our modern societies allowing 2% of the population to die without trying to prevent it is anathema. So we will commit economic hari kari and probably still loose 2%. — Punshhh

Right. I concur. Except now I have to look up "anathema" and declare some sort of pun about it, too, to remain consistent.

Overblown hysteria. The media have nothing better to report, and what better to draw attention than pretending there's a crisis. — Tzeentch

Yep.

The thing is, it simply is a no-brainer for the governments to treat an epidemic with all-out measures once the media hype has set in. Just why would they dare to say "Nah... even if it's a more potent flu epidemic than the usual seasonal flu epidemics, we won't bother." What on Earth any politician would benefit from saying that? And if there is a tiny statistical possibility that the coronavirus becomes something like the "Asian Flu" of the 1950's or the "Hong Kong Flu" of the 1960's, it would be political suicide for some politician to have said "Nah, these viruses come and go" if the death toll rises to several thousand one country.

And when epidemics can be contained with global cooperation and modern medicine, why wouldn't be contained? The fact is that actually we would have had pandemics like the "Spanish Flu" if it wasn't for modern responses. And if the media gets the chicken little's of the World to follow their reporting, why wouldn't they continue as they do?

The global economy takes a little bump, but it will recover.

Isn't this just another case for antinatalism though- pandemics? This one isn't particularly deadly (except for older folks and those with pre-existing respitory conditions). However, it can mutate, and even if it doesn't kill, it causes a lot of physical pain and discomfort, like other diseases. Physical ailments of all sorts should tell us something, but we aren't listening. It's not Ebola or anything of that magnitude, but that type of disease can also spread. Physical illness just shows us that we are blissfully ignorant when things are going as we want or expect them to.

I don't buy the arguments that we should stop looking at the most negative aspects or that we should not ignore human ingenuity and resiliency. Tell that to yourself or to someone who is actually affected. On recovery, I don't see this bright sunshine rosy thing, I just see how miserable life can be. Why put more people into that possibility and/or inevitability? If you've ever had constant vomiting/diarrhea for more than a few days.. existence does not become that much brighter because it ended eventually. If you have a sudden bought of pneumonia and shortness of breath, making it through isn't shrug and go "isn't that funny about life?". Even common sore throats, runny noses, and general achiness doesn't make the cut as "just the cost of living".

Why put more people into that? Because they can climb mountains, read poetry, be a part of "nature", and whatever else generic sentimental bullshit we like to throw in as the payoff? Get the hell out of here.

@god must be atheist
@Janus
@Nils Loc
@ZhouBoTong
@Punshhh
@Frank Apisa

But they don't want to shut their borders, which is what they will need to do. — Punshhh

Catch 22. Shutting of borders will lead to economic depression if not collapse, shortages of not just cheap consumer items that might be thought to be inessential, but also shortages of food, fuel, essential components of industry, medical care, medications and so on.

On the plus side a great depression or collapse might contribute towards ameliorating the effects of carbon emissions.

But there are far more cases than with SARS and MERS. The Corona death toll is now more than those two combined. — Monitor

Take a look at the top two statistics (comparing deaths this year from Covid-19 and seasonal influenza) on this site

Take a look at the top two statistics (comparing deaths this year from Covid-19 and seasonal influenza) on this site — Janus

Thanks, that is a very useful site. Of course, then that asks how many of the seasonal influenza deaths were preventable with the proper care which would not stop Covid-19. Data we will never have.

Thanks, that is a very useful site. Of course, then that asks how many of the seasonal influenza deaths were preventable with the proper care which would not stop Covid-19. Data we will never have. — Monitor

You cant trust Data coming out of China. From countries with more reliable information, we know that the mortality rate for Corona is about 2%, while that for normal influence is about 0.1%. Ergo, the Chinese Corona is about 20 more deadly. NOT the same.

Coronavirus Age, Sex, Demographics

I'm in the .2% risk pool if these rates aren't entirely nonsense. They say a majority of Chinese males smoke and this may exacerbate the the death rate since viral pneumonia is the principle killer.

You cant trust Data coming out of China. From countries with more reliable information, we know that the mortality rate for Corona is about 2%, while that for normal influence is about 0.1%. Ergo, the Chinese Corona is about 20 more deadly. NOT the same. — Nobeernolife

That has not been established; estimates currently range between .7% and 3 %. The mortality rate outside China has been, so far, much lower than China's mortality rate. China's mortality rate may be much lower than it appears if they have been under-reporting the number of infections, and accurately reporting the number of deaths.

I hear you, there is the issue of how people and leaders address this crisis. Do they close borders and prevent the spread across the world, while crashing their economies. Or do they just let it in an take a hit to their population.

It is a catch 22, where do we turn?
Hopefully a cure all vaccine will be produced, but that may take more than a year and then God knows how long to administer it. Also it may mutate and the vaccine might not be very effective.

Perhaps this is the corner we turn towards the fading out of our civilisation.

On the plus side a great depression or collapse might contribute towards ameliorating the effects of carbon emissions.

Yes and it might sober us up a bit, from this drunken populist malaise.

I hear you, there is the issue of how people and leaders address this crisis. Do they close borders and prevent the spread across the world, while crashing their economies. Or do they just let it in an take a hit to their population.

It is a catch 22, where do we turn?
Hopefully a cure all vaccine will be produced, but that may take more than a year and then God knows how long to administer it. Also it may mutate and the vaccine might not be very effective.

Perhaps this is the corner we turn towards the fading out of our civilisation. — Punshhh

How about part of the response is not having children?