Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#1

Post by tarruda » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:12 PM UTC

Source [1]. Note that I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories so I will focus only on non-political information. I hope someone one the field can fact-check the information presented and correct any interpretation mistakes on my part:

- The test that is currently used was not extensively validated and quickly accepted by WHO due to urgency. This raises the following questions: - Is it possible that we are seeing false positives, where people with flu-like symptoms are wrongly identified as having SARS-CoV-2? - Are we certain that the test is implemented correctly everywhere?

- To find infection/death rates, are we doing tests on the whole population, or only on certain groups, such as people that went to hospitals feeling cold symptoms?

- Is it possible that infection rates are higher than normal because more people are going to hospitals (due to widespread panic), and thus get infected more easily than if they had treated common cold symptoms at home?

- Are the flu deaths increasing because of the coronavirus? Consider this: - In Germany, between 20000 and 30000 people die yearly from flu, mostly on winter. - Assume that in previous years we tested all seriously ill patients for coronavirus (which didn't happen). In this scenario, where we tested everyone, it is expected that between 2000 and 3000 of the dead would also have a coronavirus (which doesn't imply they died because of coronavirus). - Due to panic, more people are filling the hospital beds, possibly leaving the really sick without proper care, thus increasing deaths. - In Germany, there are currently 33 deaths attributed to coronavirus, nowhere near the expected number. Note that Germany has considerably more hospital beds than Italy [2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_AyuhbnPOI

[2] https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/flattening-the-coronavirus-curve-is-not-enough/

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#2

Post by rossdavidh » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:20 PM UTC

The answer to your question is almost certainly, "yes". Any look at the grocery stores will confirm this.

Unfortunately, exactly in which ways we are overreacting, is trickier. It is possible for us to be overreacting, but Covid-19 still to be a serious problem.

One could also argue that, since we lose 25-60,000 people a year to flu in the U.S. alone, we were underreacting before. If we lost 25,000 people to a new threat, we would consider that appalling. It may be that we are overreacting to this because it's a new threat, but perhaps we were underreacting before?

Probably, it is some of both.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#3

Post by cassianoleal » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

I've found this thread useful in trying to answer this very question:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1239975682643357696.html

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#4

Post by allears » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:31 PM UTC

Epidemiology and virology are serious sciences. This stuff has been studied, and studies confirmed in the real world, for a very long time now. If those guys are worried, Imma gonna shelter in place and do my best to follow other recommendations. But that's only part of the real problem, which is that our modern society is a house of cards that depends on every part working well, and even then it breaks down all the time. Whatcha gonna do when most parts break down? I guess we're going to find out. I don't think it will be full-on Mad Max (or rather I hope not). But wishful thinking ain't gonna cut it.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#5

Post by rland » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

I’m not really sure if we’re overreacting. But it sure seems like we are entering this endeavor completely without a plan. We’re not going to be able to stockpile food and furlough half the economy forever, and as soon as we start coming out of hibernation, spread will just ramp right back up again.

I think the lack of leadership and foresight will likely cause thousands to lose their lives and trillions in economic damage.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#6

Post by salmon30salmon » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:33 PM UTC

Yes. The biggest issue is that we lack any idea regarding how infected the population currently is, or was. We don't know if 25% of all Americans have had a minor infection at this point and are less vulnerable. We don't know how it hung around Washington State undetected for six weeks.

On the one hand, when dealing with the risks associated with a pandemic it is wise to error on the side of caution, but as we go through this we learn more and more how little we knew when we launched this panic campaign.

Until we have a reasonable sampling the entire population, claiming this is the doomsday virus is incredibly dangerous. Shutting down the economy is incredibly dangerous considering our lack of knowledge about this virus.

Incomplete information has spread like absolute wildfire on the internet, and closures and overreactions fell like dominos as worst case scenarios were leaked without context. It is maddening

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#7

Post by rguzman » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:34 PM UTC

it's a bad model to think of measures responding to covid as scalars. they have magnitude and direction.

everything below is me spitballing -- weakly held:

my thinking is that we should err on the side of caution, which means that if anything, in terms of flattening the curve, we haven't done enough, yet, but there is also that any it takes ~1-2 weeks to see the effects of any one action. once the curve is flattening, i think we ought to relax on this front as to minimize the economic damage.

in terms of structural changes to medical system (think FDA approvals), i think that we're also under-reacting, but i don't know enough to really say.

in terms of stimulating the economy, i think we've also under-reacted so far, though the latest bills look a bit promising on this front and i think if they pass they are of about the right magnitude.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#8

Post by phaedryx » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:35 PM UTC

Depends on which "we":

The members of my community that got into a brawl over toilet paper at Costco: Yes

The members of my family who have been sending funny videos of each other because we're all stuck at home with kids: No

The members of my local gaming group that make sure to wipe down the table and wash our hands before we play: No

...

Basically, I think it is a mixed bag. Yes, we should be cautious and mindful. I agree that we don't usually put things in their proper perspective when assessing threats.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#9

Post by helen___keller » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

I don't have the background to answer your questions, but even if I steelman and assume the worst outcome here (issues with the test, issues with epidemiology, that we're crowding out hospitals, that we're infecting via hospitals), I would argue that we are still not overreacting:

In the original outbreak of wuhan, there could not have been overpreparation because there was no preparation, the outbreak simply happened. So, we should look at wuhan pre-citywide-quarantine to get a feel for what it would look like if we chose to not "overreact", as originally there was no real "test" being administered, cases were diagnosed by CT scans of lungs for pneumonia, and there were not extreme imposed social distancing or population-wide quarantine.

So, any issues we might have in the west, should not apply to the original outbreak in wuhan. And in wuhan the casualties of the outbreak were on the order of 1-5% (i think estimates varied a lot for some of the reasons you list). In any case, it overloaded hospitals and a lot of people died.

If the infection reaches a broader population (the 'underreaction' scenario), it suffices to say the death rate will be a MINIMUM of 1-5%, as obviously the situation would be even worse with a large percentage of the population sick. This would continue until the population reaches herd immunity, estimated 30-60% of population infected.

Thus, we can conclude 1-5% of that 30-60% of the infected population would die, which in america ranges from about 1 million to nearly 10 million deaths. This is far far far greater than the yearly flu outbreak. And that's assuming that the rapid spread of the disease doesn't cause secondary effects through deteriorating supply chains (who staffs grocery stores if 60% of the population is home? who drives trucks to keep supply chains going? who works the amazon fulfillment center?)

Thus, I would conclude that the penalties for unabated spread of the disease are so horrific that the only reasonable response is something that looks like an overreaction: extreme social distancing, shutting down cities aside from vital functions, etc.

Because atleast our groceries stores operate and our supply chains are running.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overreacting to coronavirus?

#10

Post by tossitfarther » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

Early last week, one of the hospitals near me (NYC) had zero confirmed cases but a couple of people who were exhibiting Covid-like symptoms bad enough they required hospitalization.

On Thursday of last week, this hospital had their first several confirmed positive cases. Keep in mind that in the early days of this, the criteria for testing in the US has been "you are already very sick and you require hospitalization for something with similar symptoms"

On Tuesday of this week, as tests became more available, that hospital had ~20 suspected and confirmed cases.

On Wednesday they were at 22 confirmed cases and 22 suspected cases where people are sick enough to require hospitalization but test results haven't come back yet.

Last week, the hospital was dealing with normal load and on standby should this become a problem. In the space of a little over a week, they now have a floor devoted to patients who are a) sick enough to require hospitalization and b) have tested positive and another floor devoted to patients who are a) sick enough to require hospitalization and b) are presumed to have this based on symptoms presented, pending test results.

It's just one facility, but I personally cannot look at a single hospital that had zero known cases last week, which now has two floors devoted to active cases this week and comfort myself with, "It's fine, this is just the flu."