well, upwind, if 1-5% are at risk of flu death, I think that is pretty serious, if not a reason for panic. Who would you choose to be in that percentage?
rhubarb, this is different, because most bugs that go round, the population has some residual immunity to (hence kids often get them but their parents don't). In the case of a novel flu virus this is not the case. While the cynics and naysayers are right to stem hysteria and panic, no-one should delude themselves that this is 'only' the same as every other bug. The reality is that we just don't know yet.
It IS mild, but flu has the potential to mutate rapidly either to fizzle out or become more serious. This is indeed what happened in 1918 (leaving aside all the general public health issues that made that a bad pandemic) when a weak first wave in spring, turned into a horrific second wave the following autumn.
There is anti-viral treatment but many flu viruses develop resistance to them, and will be more likely to do so with over-use (which is why I think it is unwise for the NHS to administer these without symptoms, or for people to try and buy them privately). There might be a vaccine in 4-5 months.
The key difference with a pandemic flu and 'normal' viruses is that it culls the fit and healthy.
So I don't think it is wise for people to just go 'yeah yeah whatever'. The WHO are not stupid people, and all the conspiracy theories are frankly ridiculous. But neither is it sane to run around like Chicken Little. Wash your hands, don't clog up the NHS unnecessarily, stay home if you have symptoms, prepare for social and economic disruption and school closures. That's about all we can do.