>>>>>I looked up some data on the 2009 H1N1 flu (Obama administration - but I'm sure it was Bush's fault). and compared it to the coronavirus. To me the current panic doesn't match the facts. Do any of you remember the same panic in 2009? So, where are we today?
>>>
>>>Issue so far is "we don't know what we don't know" and the vast majority of evidence is in one overseas country that is accused of covering up facts. We don't know what we don't know about that, either.
>>>
>>>COVID-19 appears to be more contagious than Ebola but less deadly than flu.
>>
>>I believe that is incorrect? I thought COVID-19 had a mortality rate more than 20 times higher.
>>https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-myths.html
>
>I would give livescience about 50 out of 100.
>For example:
>- COVID-19, is estimated at about 2.2, meaning a single infected person will infect about 2.2 others, on average. By comparison, the flu has an R0 of 1.3.
>They should replace "estimated" with " wild ass guess".
>
>- seasonal flu vaccine prevents influenza relatively well, even when its formulation doesn't perfectly match the circulating viral strains.
>Mayo Clinic
>Reviews of past studies have found that, on average, the flu vaccine is about 50% to 60% effective for healthy adults who are between 18 and 64 years old. The vaccine may sometimes be less effective.
>
>- according to a study published Feb. 18 by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. About 13.8% report severe illness,
>The same people who provided the data I cited for Hunan Province - 4 deaths out of a population of 60 million in 4 months. I have high dry land in Florida and a bridge in NY for sale.
>
>-in comparison, recent data suggests that COVID-19 has a mortality rate more than 20 times higher, of around 2.3%, according to a study published Feb. 18 by the China CDC
>-But these numbers are continuously evolving and may not represent the actual mortality rate
>Why don't they say "We are just guessing"?

It's not a guess, it's just the current rate vs the current rate tomorrow, (or later) based upon the data available at the time.
There are a few problems, one is that without proper testing it's hard to establish numbers, the 2nd is that despite what many people think, medicine is not an exact science to begin with.
So basically this brings me back to what I said to begin with -- it's most likely to early to tell. We don't have enough data yet. I would just add not to take any advice that Trump offered on Fox News Hannity show -- if we all did that everyone would die lol lol

>>> In fact it's suggested the majority of those "infected" may experience a mild illness if they notice anything at all. The frail and already sick will do worse, as tens of thousands do from flu every year.
>>
>>>Most of the panic we see is from elites who usually like to lecture the plebs not to panic. Witness politicians muttering darkly about inadequate preparations for the imminent apocalypse, frantic lemming sell-offs in the stock market and media shock horror at every new case with a background of supermarket armageddon and toilet paper riots.
>>>
>>>Meanwhile Joe and Josephine Deplorable just get on with it.