Talk

Advanced search

To not get the panic about Corona Virus?

(373 Posts)
speakout Fri 24-Jan-20 21:52:39

I am not getting it- can someone explain?

Less than 1000- people infected, 26 dead. Why the hype?
I understand a few pharma companies making anti virals have made a stack of money in the past week.
In global health terms these stats are insignificant surely.
Why all the headlines?
I suspect we have many pathogens jumping species barriers on a regular basis, most probably fade away and don' t make headlines.

Can someone explain.

tobedtoMNandfart Fri 24-Jan-20 21:55:02

Because of how pandemics work. 1 infects 10, 10 infect 100, 100 infect 1000, 1000 infect 10,000 etc etc etc

tobedtoMNandfart Fri 24-Jan-20 21:55:48

I'm nit panicking either but I think it's wise to stay informed.

John470322 Fri 24-Jan-20 21:56:07

For friends and relatives of those who have died it is a disaster and they need support. It is not a massive issue for fit and healthy people here in the UK

GorkyMcPorky Fri 24-Jan-20 21:56:10

Well YANBU because the panic is being whipped up by the press as per. But of course readers are going to react because that's the intent of sensationalisn.

speakout Fri 24-Jan-20 21:56:25

tobedtoMNandfart

How do we know this will be a pandemic though?

speakout Fri 24-Jan-20 21:58:13

John470322

I don't underestimate the personal tragedy for those that have been struck by this disease and the impact on their families- that's not my point though.

tobedtoMNandfart Fri 24-Jan-20 21:58:50

I think the general scientific consensus is that a pandemic, of varying consequence, is inevitable. Therefore it's entirely reasonable to conjecture whether this is shaping up to be one.

tobedtoMNandfart Fri 24-Jan-20 22:00:26

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7925475/US-health-experts-predicted-coronavirus-kill-65million-people-year-THREE-months-ago.html

speakout Fri 24-Jan-20 22:02:23

tobedtoMNandfart

You illustrate my point very well- a Daily Mail link- the ultimate font of all scientific and epidemiological information.

letmeinthroughyourwindow Fri 24-Jan-20 22:04:35

Because it is new, has a mortality rate of 3% whereas normal seasonal flu has a mortality rate of 1% and typically kills 400,000 globally each year, it has no vaccine, because we don't know enough about it yet so sensible precautions seem appropriate, because numbers infected are likely to be higher because people don't always seek out healthcare professionals, because China is taking it seriously. I agree that we in the UK don't need to panic, but it's potentially serious and newsworthy imo.

SabineUndine Fri 24-Jan-20 22:04:44

Couldn't agree more. This is distracting attention from more immediate crises that should be dominating the news.

PurplePickleJuice Fri 24-Jan-20 22:05:13

Its considered likely the numbers so far have been downplayed. Epidemiologists are saying that with the numbers appearing outside China, it's likely its far higher inside.

Also reports of hospitals being full, and people dying who are not being counted as having died of coronavirus.

Bear in mind this is so early it hasn't even been given a fancy name like Wuhan flu yet.

And they shut down travel from a city of 11 million people but I'm sure that was just for Big Pharma.

Thelnebriati Fri 24-Jan-20 22:06:04

We got lucky, it fizzled out when it could have been so much worse, no one was being unreasonable by preparing for a potential pandemic.

mokapot Fri 24-Jan-20 22:08:03

There’s a beer virus????

Reallybadidea Fri 24-Jan-20 22:08:59

If just 1 in 10 of the world's population became infected then you'd be looking at around 20 million dead. And it could mutate to become more deadly.

HuloBeraal Fri 24-Jan-20 22:09:22

Ok my Dh is a consultant in ID. I asked him and this is what he says:

The infection rate for Pandemic Flu is 1 to 2. So 1 person infects 2 people. That’s much higher than normal flu which is 1 to 1.2.
Coronavirus has the same infection rate as pandemic flu.
Second because it’s new. And none of us have any immunity for it.
So for NOW the mortality rate is not high but the infection rate is. Which means that the infection can spread rapidly and so even if the mortality rate remains low the total number who die will be high.

GrapefruitsAreNotTheOnlyFruit Fri 24-Jan-20 22:10:59

Well I don't think the Chinese would be shutting down cities etc if they didn't consider it serious. The press aren't actually making that bit up.

speakout Fri 24-Jan-20 22:11:03

And it could mutate to become more deadly.

Same goes for any pathogen.

speakout Fri 24-Jan-20 22:12:26

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Kb12 Fri 24-Jan-20 22:13:48

He's a consultant in infectious diseases so he would be an expert.

FizzyIce Fri 24-Jan-20 22:14:01

Because we have some sort of “killer” virus every couple of years or so .
Keeps us on our toes and keeps the big Pharma in cash

HuloBeraal Fri 24-Jan-20 22:15:24

Big Pharma doesn’t care. This stuff doesn’t make money. (DH has also worked in pharma in flu before going back to medicine). The funding for this stuff will need to come from WHO/Gates. Pharma won’t make money from this.
(Eg contrary to popular belief Pharma doesn’t make that much money from vaccines if at all. It’s only 3-4% of all global sales. However anti obesity pills, or Viagra say, those are the real money makers. Or over the counter medication. And currently the real big money is in rare disease- Duchenne’s or CF drugs).

HuloBeraal Fri 24-Jan-20 22:15:59

Well I am a professor of history. I can answer any historical questions you might have?!

HeresMe Fri 24-Jan-20 22:16:27

If just 1 in 10 of the world's population became infected then you'd be looking at around 20 million dead. And it could mutate to become more deadly.

Your Mathes are way out

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »