Please consider: Based on the most current data concerning the China virus, the anti-flubros may in fact be correct in their assumptions ... but not in the way they hoped to be. The most recent data reported by Johns Hopkins reports includes the following:
Infections
COVID-19: Approximately 1,286,409 cases worldwide; 337,933 cases in the U.S. as of Apr. 6, 2020
Flu: Estimated 1 billion cases worldwide; 9.3 million to 45 million cases in the U.S. per year.
Deaths
COVID-19: Approximately 70,356 deaths reported worldwide; 9,653 deaths in the U.S., as of Apr. 6, 2020.
Flu: 291,000 to 646,000 deaths worldwide; 12,000 to 61,000 deaths in the U.S. per year.
So based on what we know today, this China virus is not, in fact and as the anti-flubros proffer, "just like the regular flu"; this China virus appears to be significantly less virulant and signficantly less lethal than the "regular flu".
Sorry anti-flubros, but you do need to hold the data -- the facts -- above the interpretation of models especially when the models are consistently inaccurate in their predictions and, most importantly, in the inevitability of their predictions.
As an aside, I do appreciate that by employing the reference to Dunning-Kruger you have at least elevated the name-calling to a higher level than "flubros", which, of course, results in an air of superiority over those who employ the far weaker perjorative against those with whom they disagree.
Cheers!
Hopefully, you turn out to be right, but you still have to account for the higher level of contagion going into the future, as well as all the idiots out there who still refuse to social distance (presumably continuing to hang out in large groups). Estimates of R0 for the Chinese Crud range anywhere from 1.7 to 5 or 6, with some dependence on how densely populated an infected area is.
And the sooner we get ultimately accurate numbers (I suspect that a CDC modeling of the outbreak afterward will have the CFR at around 0.2 to 0.3% rather than the nearly 3 percent officially tallied, when all the uncounted cases are estimated). And the sooner this thing goes away, the sooner we can open our economy back up. Go away, Chines Crud, go away!
I do NOT want to see what the government does in case the anti-vaxxers precipitate a truly major measles outbreak. Measles has an R0 between 12 and 18!
“So based on what we know today, this China virus is not, in fact and as the anti-flubros proffer, “just like the regular flu”; this China virus appears to be significantly less virulant and signficantly less lethal than the “regular flu”.”
That’s just flat out stupid.
The “absolute numbers” argument is a logical fallacy. It’s so January.
The whole point of doing what we are doing is to keep the relative number of infections down as long as we can. I know you’ve seen the scenarios where we just “let ‘er rip”. But you simply ignore data and conclusions you do not like. And now you’re doing victory laps? One of the “only” so many people have died sickos I just referenced.