In my opinion, most of the "don't worry, it will be OK on it's own" crowd, are missing the main points regarding this new (novell) virus.
Why be concerned (meaning take part in or support basic common sense approaches to trying to reduce the impact of this virus) especially if I (you) am not in the "should be worried" category?
For one, the only examples where the outbreak has been controlled or contained (minimized, but still not a great outcome) are China, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, where (what we would consider) drastic social distancing measures have been undertaken. Until recently (in Italy), the western world has shown that there is no appetite to do these things. Why do these things (distancing) show any success? Besides reducing spread by potentially reducing contact between possibly infected people, there is the issue of "exponential" spread amongst a population with no "herd immunity". If you look at graphs of the number of "reported" cases, you can clearly see the exponential component to this spread (except in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan where they are seeing a much "flatter" curve). One sick person infects 3-7 others, who infects 3-7 others each, and onward. After all, no one is immune. Flattening this curve (or reducing the height of the peak) helps to "protect" the functioning of the health care system (reducing the overwhelming numbers of cases presenting all at once). In other words, it spreads it out over time.
As an example, take one drop of water put into Yankee stadium and double the amount of water every minute. If this process started at noon, by 12:50 (50 doublings later) the stadium is full. However, at 12:45 there is only about 5 feet of water in the stadium. This is an example of exponential growth. If unchecked (no measures taken) we in western countries are only at the beginning of this "exponential growth" curve (unless something changes).
Back to the beginning of my post, what we would be trying to avoid, is a total overwhelming of our respective health care systems by shear numbers of patients needing medical help AT THE SAME TIME. Current numbers strongly suggest that 15% or more of those infected with this virus will require medical intervention (like O2, antibiotics, hospital stays, etc.) and up to 5% require ICU treatment. Yes old people with the new virus would not get the "extra" care needed to save them, but also everyone else would find it very, very difficult to receive treatment for anything else as well!! Accident, heart attacks, stroke victims, any people who require regular treatment for an existing or newly developing illness, surgery, etc. Emergency response like ambulance responses could be greatly delayed. We are just now starting to realize the potential economic costs as well. See stock market responses.
For those who state, "well we don't know if the current numbers being used are accurate". Yes! But that is all we currently have to go off. The true, final numbers won't be known until well after the fact. Way too late to help us make decisions now! At the beginning of the Spanish Flu outbreak most locales chose the course of minimizing their response. How did that "plan" (actually lack of a plan) work out for them? San Francisco took proactive measures and these measures proved to be effective, until they were caught unawares in the second and third wave.
No one (to the best of our knowledge) has immunity to this new virus. Never seen it before. Reports today from Northern Italy speak to a very bad situation. Hospitals are full. Health care workers are either exhausted, or sick, and those who are not now, probably will be due to long hours of work and long exposure to the virus. The current death numbers from Italy are very high compared to what some other countries are reporting. This should be troubling to everyone.
Based on what we have seen in China, Italy, Iran, and elsewhere, why would we take the risky tactic of "doing little to nothing" because it is "only going to kill off a few old people" and we don't know if the numbers are accurate?? If that tactic proves wrong, it will then be too late to have any chance of effectively "changing course" mid stream and then implementing "stronger" measures. If nothing else, the history lessons from the Spanish Flu of 1918 show us that!
Don't misunderstand me, I am advocating a panic, or even saying that this will be as bad as the Spanish Flu. I am not suggesting "draconian" measures. What I am saying is: take it seriously and implement common sense approaches to this "little known" brand new to us, situation. Why? Because waiting to see what happens could be too late to prevent major consequences. No one knows what each path (do little or implement basic social distancing) will look like (no crystal ball that I know of) for sure, but the worst case is not worth risking IMHO.
Good luck to all of you, I hope for the best for each of you. May no one you care about unduly suffer or die.
"Undeserved panic does no one any good. But neither does ill-informed complacency."
