[Goose]

That's double the mortality rate of the flu, and would be coupled with the flu such that treating facilities would be even more strapped to provide high quality care than ordinary. There's also no herd immunity, so the likelihood of many older individuals getting it would seem much higher than with flu strains, which have been circulating and mutating for decades.

The fact this is a novel virus makes it much more dangerous. Right now, I believe it is probable that the statistics are incorrect for many of the reasons described here and elsewhere. The data is limited and in some cases of dubious accuracy. However, the lack of substantial community immunity built up over time can make this virus a much bigger problem than the other, somewhat similar virus we deal with all the time. Slowing down the spread of this virus will at least give health care systems the capacity to provide appropriate help to those who need it. More people will die than we would wish, but at least not because we were overwhelmed. That is all we can hope for at this point.

It would have been nice if humanity had been able to keep this virus completely contained. Under those conditions it could have died out in the human population. Unfortunately it appears that is not possible at this point. It would have been asking a lot to immediately recognize this new disease when it first emerged and asking even more that radical steps be taken to contain it. New diseases have emerged in the past and will continue to do so in the future. What is different today is the rate at which they can spread. Population density is higher and transportation is much better. It would be nice if humanity increased it's ability to respond. However, with all our other more pressing issues, I doubt we will.

[Goose]

That's double the mortality rate of the flu, and would be coupled with the flu such that treating facilities would be even more strapped to provide high quality care than ordinary. There's also no herd immunity, so the likelihood of many older individuals getting it would seem much higher than with flu strains, which have been circulating and mutating for decades.

The fact this is a novel virus makes it much more dangerous. Right now, I believe it is probable that the statistics are incorrect for many of the reasons described here and elsewhere. The data is limited and in some cases of dubious accuracy. However, the lack of substantial community immunity built up over time can make this virus a much bigger problem than the other, somewhat similar virus we deal with all the time. Slowing down the spread of this virus will at least give health care systems the capacity to provide appropriate help to those who need it. More people will die than we would wish, but at least not because we were overwhelmed. That is all we can hope for at this point.

It would have been nice if humanity had been able to keep this virus completely contained. Under those conditions it could have died out in the human population. Unfortunately it appears that is not possible at this point. It would have been asking a lot to immediately recognize this new disease when it first emerged and asking even more that radical steps be taken to contain it. New diseases have emerged in the past and will continue to do so in the future. What is different today is the rate at which they can spread. Population density is higher and transportation is much better. It would be nice if humanity increased it's ability to respond. However, with all our other more pressing issues, I doubt we will.