New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

Post by JoshGlazebrook » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:01 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #173

Viruses are scary. My company switched to work at home maybe 18 months ago, so I no longer am exposed to the viruses of my coworkers. At the grocery stores at which I buy most of my food I use the self checkout, so no interacting with humans there. At McDonalds I order and pay at the kiosks, so no human interaction there except when they hand me the bag with my food. At Burger King and Wendy's I do order at the count…

Post by dang » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:10 PM UTC

moulei wrote: post #22

>I think this is just a massive overcorrection due to China's 2003 SARS outbreak but we'll start seeing more and more of these large scale quarantines as our civilization comes to terms with the realities of cheap air travel. I don't think is an "overcorrection". Lockdown is a top-level warning. Most Chinese people have no so much medical common sense, only a warning like this can stop them from trying to return home…

Post by ngcc_hk » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:15 PM UTC

sdiw wrote: post #21

From what I've read it came from bats. Most probably bats being eaten.[1] Bats have been the source of at least 4 pandemics. It's interesting to note that current coronavirus spreading in China and the SARS outbreak of 2003 have two things in common: Both are from the coronavirus family, and both were passed from animals to humans in a wet market.[2] I tried to put together a page for coronavirus in China here where…

Post by dang » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

auggierose wrote: post #129

leeshire wrote: post #118

I don't understand why people eat monkey or bats? if they have all these virus or diseases in them. It's 2020 we have more food in the world than we did years ago no need to eat a bat just grab an apple.

There is a reason why "Contagion" starts in China ...

Post by ggm » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:29 PM UTC

mrb wrote: post #175

tunesmith wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

General consensus so far seems to be about twice as fatal as the annual flu. (Which says nothing about transmissibility rate / R0, which they are still figuring out.) Really rough numbers, annual flu is around 0.1% , while the spanish flu was more like 2.5% So, not a pandemic in terms of fatality. General sense so far seems to be it's more of a big deal than the (run-of-the-mill) flu, less of a big deal than SARS. (K…

Care to quote a source for "twice as fatal as the flu"? Everything indicates it's way worse. 6 of the first 41 identified patients have died. That's a mortality rate of 15%. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Caveat: 41 is a very small sample, and the first patients are likely to have been the most severe cases (pre-existing conditions, weak immune systems, etc). And when you take publicl…