urban75 forums
There is a classic template for how a new disease which shows up as pneumonia is detected and initially reported. Unless the outbreak is already massive when first detected, a period of inevitable uncertainty will follow where it is impossible to tell the difference between something that has pandemic potential that will be fulfilled, and something that will fizzle our or otherwise remain relatively constrained.
We now have a new opportunity to see such a story unfold:
www.bbc.co.uk
Several classic features are present in the initial reports, such as:
Pneumonia with unexplained cause, with a number of common causes already ruled out.
Some spread to healthcare workers.
Reassuring but premature comments about a lack of detected wider human to human transmission chains.
Some deaths which make it more likely authorities will take it seriously.
General public and media awareness of the relevance of such incidents are obviously increased as a result of the covid pandemic. In the early 2000s I used to pay attention to early disease outbreak news, stuff that usually did not end up amounting to very much. But that early on could have the theoretical potential to cause a pandemic until such possibilities could be excluded via the accumulation of more knowledge and the passing of time/seeing whether the outbreak grew. There are no magic shortcuts which can give us a much better chance of guessing at this early stage what the outcome of a particular outbreak will be. So I am starting this thread with the framing of observing how the details and reporting of this particular outbreak unfold, and how people react to the news, rather than making any silly claims that I have any particular feelings about how this one will turn out. Typically I might have tended to avoid posting about this sort of news until the next stage of detail had been established, eg with Covid I did not start the initial threads, did not post about it after the very first public news of it on December 31st 2019, did not really join in until mid January 2020. But I want to treat this Argentina stuff as an example to study the initial reporting details and how long it takes for a clearer picture to emerge. I dont want to turn it into a prophecy of doom, that would come later and only if particular facts become apparent. Experts have to take it seriously at this stage so they can respond, everyone elses sense of alarm should try to remain on hold for now.
For now I will note that in the BBC report, the idea that this outbreak could have pandemic potential is only alluded to rather than explicitly stated, eg:
We now have a new opportunity to see such a story unfold:
Mystery pneumonia: Argentina investigates three deaths
Three of nine people struck with the unexplained respiratory illness in recent days have died.
www.bbc.co.uk
Several classic features are present in the initial reports, such as:
Pneumonia with unexplained cause, with a number of common causes already ruled out.
Some spread to healthcare workers.
Reassuring but premature comments about a lack of detected wider human to human transmission chains.
Some deaths which make it more likely authorities will take it seriously.
General public and media awareness of the relevance of such incidents are obviously increased as a result of the covid pandemic. In the early 2000s I used to pay attention to early disease outbreak news, stuff that usually did not end up amounting to very much. But that early on could have the theoretical potential to cause a pandemic until such possibilities could be excluded via the accumulation of more knowledge and the passing of time/seeing whether the outbreak grew. There are no magic shortcuts which can give us a much better chance of guessing at this early stage what the outcome of a particular outbreak will be. So I am starting this thread with the framing of observing how the details and reporting of this particular outbreak unfold, and how people react to the news, rather than making any silly claims that I have any particular feelings about how this one will turn out. Typically I might have tended to avoid posting about this sort of news until the next stage of detail had been established, eg with Covid I did not start the initial threads, did not post about it after the very first public news of it on December 31st 2019, did not really join in until mid January 2020. But I want to treat this Argentina stuff as an example to study the initial reporting details and how long it takes for a clearer picture to emerge. I dont want to turn it into a prophecy of doom, that would come later and only if particular facts become apparent. Experts have to take it seriously at this stage so they can respond, everyone elses sense of alarm should try to remain on hold for now.
For now I will note that in the BBC report, the idea that this outbreak could have pandemic potential is only alluded to rather than explicitly stated, eg: