Ah the joys of extrapolating an emerging epidemic at an early stage,
It's worth reading this article from
Bill Nye the Scientist GuyGabriel Leung himself:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/opin ... earch.html
Approach it with a level head and an open mind, not the scare mongering of rags like the Grauniad or the Daily Hate. We don't know enough yet, and if the words of the man himself are
against this kind of "cacophony of real news, fake news and pseudoscience that feeds uncertainty and breeds panic", I would take the panicky headlines of the tabloids with a massive dose of salt. I haven't even found where they've pulled this 60% figure from. His version of the "TIP OF THE ICEBERG" headline is a little more reassuring:
No. 1 is the “clinical iceberg” question: How much of it is hidden below the surface? Because the outbreak is still evolving, we can’t yet see the totality of those infected. Out of view is some proportion of mildly infected people, with minor symptoms or no symptoms, who no one knows are infected.
A fleet of invisible carriers sounds ominous; but in fact, an enormous hidden figure would mean many fewer of the infected are dying. Usually, simple math would determine this “case fatality” ratio: divide the total number of deaths by the total number of people infected. In an emerging epidemic, however, both numbers keep changing, and sometimes at different speeds. This makes simple division impossible; you will invariably get it wrong.
Don't. Panic. And put the extremist rags down, whether they're left wing, right wing or "Independent" (clickbait). Classic media is dying, and resorting to hysteria, clickbait and disingenuous interpretations to sell papers. Unfortunately the replacement the Internet is also terrible for fake news and the spread of bullshit, but thankfully big players like Facebook are starting to wise up. For now I think the onus is on us as individuals to try and dig down to the source of things like this wherever possible and to the extent we understand, and read that. And where possible also see what their influences and biases are, if any.
It's right that they're advising the world's governments quite sternly though and show them the (unlikely, but if nothing was done) worst case scenario, because otherwise they don't do enough. Better to be over-cautious than complacent with this sort of thing.
We seem to be doing alright in this country, I have a friend (sadly with a few mental health problems and paranoia so he's finding it hard to cope) who was automatically quarantined after travelling at the wrong time, they're really making him wait until they're quite sure he's safe.
