Elbump.
I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher, an HBO current affairs / comedy show filmed in California. The host, who is usually quite an observant, funny commentator, said he thought the reaction to the Covid-19 was too much, and laughed at the statistic that it's only people in their 80s who were really at risk, "If I was 80, and I still had 6 to 1 odds to live through this thing, it's not the worst."
Comedy-show or not, there is a rather common sentiment in the not-yet-ravaged world that Covid-19 isn't something bad. Apparently old people don't count while the rest of the people just have a "mild flu". But it could be argued that this impression is not the case. Children clearly aren't that affected by this virus, but in Wuhan it was definitely all age groups that were affected, with the elderly much more exposed. I am guessing that it's the same for Italians. It is because it's a novel pathogen that our bodies aren't equipped to fight. And when it infects easily in bulk it overloads the systems there to deal with it.
I'm guessing the maths really goes something like that 90% have mild symptoms or are asymptomatic, and these are the dangerous ones for they may still go to work, or go about their lives; 10% have a pretty bad time of it and may require care, especially if they have some underlying conditions; 5% of which absolutely require care in a timely way; 1% of which will have difficulty making it through unless they have excellent care. If the number is manageable and care is available, all but the unfortunate 0.5-1.0% will survive; but anything less than ready, available care will be too much for some of those 5%; and if conditions are really poor, even the rest of those 10% are at peril. I imagine that in the peak time caused by this coronavirus the health system temporarily doesn't have much time or beds for anything else, so don't have a heart attack, car crash or stroke during it. You'll be out of luck, even if your cause of death is nothing to do with covid-19.
And if there is anything to say about the complacent mindset it's this: The figures that people are using to base their suppositions of an overreaction are dominated by Chinese and Korean figures. Factored into these figures is the positive effects of the most extraordinary efforts, sacrifices and extreme techniques to keep them low. If you think that those figures represent the threat of this virus on an unsuspecting, unprepared population, you need only cast your eyes over to Italy and Iran.
And if there is anything to say about the complacent mindset it's this: The figures that people are using to base their suppositions of an overreaction are dominated by Chinese and Korean figures. Factored into these figures is the positive effects of the most extraordinary efforts, sacrifices and extreme techniques to keep them low. If you think that those figures represent the threat of this virus on an unsuspecting, unprepared population, you need only cast your eyes over to Italy and Iran.
'Nuff said for this afterthought. Elbump. Night.
1 comment:
Just following up my questioning of the rationalisation of complacency, there is a CNN commentator, Smerconish, who says he is increasing his activity to make sure that the impact of covid-19 on society is less. I agree that people should try not to change their consumption too much pre-crisis. The abandonment of eating out at Chinese restaurants, even after the travel ban, shows the reflex and the subconscious, rather than rational decision-making. We've eaten out a bit lately with a similar compassion that we support the institutions we like to get them through the drought.
BUT, one of his reasons for doing so was suspect. He cited the Diamond Princess's situation. He doubted the Chinese numbers that have 3.4% fatality rate (again, why would numbers be bent for a higher rate??) preferring the Diamond Princess's, which at present according to Wikipedia, which includes people who got off the boat as a negative and became a positive elsewhere, there were 706 infected people with 7 deaths, i.e. a 1% fatality rate. The victims have been the usual suspects: people in their 70s and 80s. There are two reasons NOT to use it as a rationalisation. (1) the 7th death was just yesterday and there are probably a large number still in ICU's. China's epidemic is still in the "grim accounting" phase where time slowly sorts through those that make it through and those that don't. The fatalities may stop at 7 but it's too early to draw conclusions on the numbers. (2) They were removed from the boat and received Japanese medical care as soon as they tested positive, i.e. good quality care in an unburdened medical system, in a timely way. Americans won't have it so nice because many don't have access to healthcare, there is a large rural population, they've acted late and that could mean their non-integrated health providers may be susceptible to a surge in patients.
I don't rule out recent cases like in Washington, "waking the dragon" as Pearl Harbour did and steel them to unite and organise to fight the common enemy, but at this point signs aren't strong. In the two days since my "Drowning in Corona" post the diagnosed cases in the US have doubled and there are three more deaths (14->17), two in Florida, one of whom was only diagnosed once he had deceased. Anyway, definitely too early for complacency.
Post a Comment