Fear The Chorizo

I thought this was a pretty good article explaining how various countries are posting different overall case and death rate totals due to testing limitations, and how many of the current tracking databases (Johns Hopkins, for example) just throw out raw numbers that come from a wide array of countries/services. Also, it makes a very good distinction between identifying the number of people who died primarily due to being infected with Covid-19 versus the number of people who were so medically frail that contracting ANY kind of respiratory illiness would likely lead to their death or require significant medical treatment. https://spectator.us/understand-report-figures-covid-deaths/ And there is no point anymore to look at what China supposedly did to limit the outbreak in their own country, because their numbers are completely false. When Wuhan funeral homes are getting 2,500-3,500 urns shipped to them per day, China's nationwide death total of roughly 3,500 and claims they kept overall cases under 100K are a complete joke. When the dust starts settling on this, there is going to be TONS of pressure from the rest of the world to accurately determine who patient 0 was back in China and also determine how they became infected and started transmitting the disease. There are too many parallels between when this virus first started surfacing in China and the height of the current trade/tariff war that resulted in the Phase 1 agreement in mid December 2019 not to get accurate details - my gut tells me the two aren't linked by nefarious actions, but China's repeated pattern of lies and current push to shift the narrative as them being a global leader in how to manage the disease should give them absolutely no benefit of the doubt.

Japan is on the other end of the spectrum. Low testing, low cases. Speculations about a TB vaccine they get could be providing an immunity, Australia’s trying the drug in 4,000 patients now I guess. Funny how Japan's cases are starting to mushroom just days after they finally decided to postpone the summer Olympics. It's almost like they were intentionally suppressing cases to try and act like they had it totally under control... It's more like low testing so the number of cases doesn't increase like everywhere else.

piggybacking from an earlier post in this thread of mine, MN now has just over 500 confirmed Covid cases after almost 18,000 tests. That's only a ~3% positive rate on people that were the most likely of even having the virus. Of those 503 cases, 252 are now no longer needed to be isolated - pretty sure that doesn't mean they are "recovered" but they aren't considered a contagious risk. Does anyone know exactly what it takes to be considered recovered? There seems to be a pronounced lag in deeming someone recovered even after they are identified as being non-contagious/non-symptomatic. The rate of people who are infected with Covid-19 no longer requiring isolation is actually increasing faster than the rate of new confirmed cases in MN...39 current cases in a MN hospital, almost all of which are around the Twin Cities metro area. For areas of moderate to low population density, social distancing starting a few weeks ago definitely appears to have made a difference. Some of the more densely populated areas aren't seeing nearly as good of results, but when you hear stories about Covid parties and large group gatherings being held in those same areas even over the past few days it's no wonder they are in worse situations. Denser populations in an area unfortunately include much better odds of having stupid people amongst them that drastically increase the risk of spread in those areas.

Doubtful that this specific number is being provided as readily with all the other updates on total number of cases, deaths, hospitalizations, etc - but a great number to also track should be the number of confirmed cases that aren't officially deemed "recovered", but identified as no longer able to require isolation on a statewide level (i.e., most likely not contagious). Also, total number of completed tests is very important on a state by state basis to gauge the accuracy of the actual confirmed case total. MN for example: 287 confirmed cases 1 death 26 hospitalizations, 12 currently critical 122 of these cases no longer require isolation almost 12,000 total tests completed - more have been conducted with pending results Roughly 6 million people living in MN, more than half of which are in the Twin Cities metro area. So roughly 2% of the people tested in MN to date that either showed symptoms or were in some sort of contact with a confirmed case contracted the coronavirus. Of those 287 they are approaching half of the current cases who no longer require isolation. 26 hospital beds being occupied by patients, 12 of them likely in ICU spaces. The 1 death was an 80-something with underlying medical conditions in addition to their age who came in contact with a family member returning from international travel. There are many more who have contracted the disease and haven't been tested, no question. But by now after 2 weeks of voluntary self-isolation one would think there should be a marked increase in this state of confirmed cases simply by a small percentage of those untested start showing symptoms or require medical attention beyond just riding the illness out at home. If that doesn't start happening, news like this morning's 1000+% increase of weekly unemployment filings continuing over the next couple weeks are going to force their way into the conversation about getting rural and moderate population center areas reopened much sooner than May. There are plenty of areas in the US in much direr straits with this disease than my neck of the woods - those areas are going to require significant response and assistance efforts to prevent their medical infrastructure from imploding for a longer time period, IMO. However, there are many more areas that should be able to start reopening their normal daily operations of public life for the majority of the population after a couple more weeks of self isolation if state and federal governments are smart and restrict movement into/out from the areas with concentrated cases (i.e. New York and some other population centers). I'm fine with not traveling to New York, LA, Chicago, or internationally for a couple months - and not seeing my 70-something parents - if it means my kids have school and most of my friends and family keep their jobs. A measured reopening of the country done the right way sooner allows for the huge chunk of change that's about to be printed out from this bill working its way through Congress to be better targeted to the people and business who really are going to need the help. There shouldn't be restrictions on unaffected areas from returning their kids to school or resuming normal daily routines because population centers in the same state or nationwide can't open their schools, too. Any achievement gap issues caused by rural schools being open when suburban/urban schools remain closed shouldn't be worth worrying about.

Doubtful that this specific number is being provided as readily with all the other updates on total number of cases, deaths, hospitalizations, etc - but a great number to also track should be the number of confirmed cases that aren't officially deemed "recovered", but identified as no longer able to require isolation on a statewide level (i.e., most likely not contagious). Also, total number of completed tests is very important on a state by state basis to gauge the accuracy of the actual confirmed case total. MN for example: 287 confirmed cases 1 death 26 hospitalizations, 12 currently critical 122 of these cases no longer require isolation almost 12,000 total tests completed - more have been conducted with pending results Roughly 6 million people living in MN, more than half of which are in the Twin Cities metro area. So roughly 2% of the people tested in MN to date that either showed symptoms or were in some sort of contact with a confirmed case contracted the coronavirus. Of those 287 they are approaching half of the current cases who no longer require isolation. 26 hospital beds being occupied by patients, 12 of them likely in ICU spaces. The 1 death was an 80-something with underlying medical conditions in addition to their age who came in contact with a family member returning from international travel. There are many more who have contracted the disease and haven't been tested, no question. But by now after 2 weeks of voluntary self-isolation one would think there should be a marked increase in this state of confirmed cases simply by a small percentage of those untested start showing symptoms or require medical attention beyond just riding the illness out at home. If that doesn't start happening, news like this morning's 1000+% increase of weekly unemployment filings continuing over the next couple weeks are going to force their way into the conversation about getting rural and moderate population center areas reopened much sooner than May. There are plenty of areas in the US in much direr straits with this disease than my neck of the woods - those areas are going to require significant response and assistance efforts to prevent their medical infrastructure from imploding for a longer time period, IMO. However, there are many more areas that should be able to start reopening their normal daily operations of public life for the majority of the population after a couple more weeks of self isolation if state and federal governments are smart and restrict movement into/out from the areas with concentrated cases (i.e. New York and some other population centers). I'm fine with not traveling to New York, LA, Chicago, or internationally for a couple months - and not seeing my 70-something parents - if it means my kids have school and most of my friends and family keep their jobs. A measured reopening of the country done the right way sooner allows for the huge chunk of change that's about to be printed out from this bill working its way through Congress to be better targeted to the people and business who really are going to need the help. There shouldn't be restrictions on unaffected areas from returning their kids to school or resuming normal daily routines because population centers in the same state or nationwide can't open their schools, too. Any achievement gap issues caused by rural schools being open when suburban/urban schools remain closed shouldn't be worth worrying about.

MN just formally issued its stay at home order through 4/10, although it really changes nothing for the majority of us who are already on house arrest. 287 confirmed cases with 26 of them being hospitalized and 1 death. Even more importantly is MN has only identified a handful of community infection cases - the vast majority remain from people returning from international travel and their immediate family living in the same household. The governor keeps saying they are expecting a surge in cases, but it hasn't showed up yet and you can feel the angst from those who have already been holed up for about 2 weeks voluntarily. Teachers are exhausted. We are trying to sort out how to manage elearning for a 1st grade spanish immersion student on outdated iPads while her younger brothers scream at each other playing and my wife and I juggle conference calls between flipping coins for who gets to leave the house to target and drive home with only half the stuff we needed due to supply issues. Also talked with my neighbor this afternoon from an acceptable distance across the yards, who is a brewmaster at a local craft brewery - even with liquor stores somehow remaining on the list of essential businesses (yay lobbying!), he's pretty certain this is the death if the craft beer boom. He is already retraining himself on car repairs because he's certain his owner is gonna have to close their doors no matter what government aid package gets pieced together and spit out scattershot so it doesnt look like a depression on a nationwide scale. He has three young kids and a wife who is having to start work at 3am as a medical biller so she doesnt crash her company's internet during typical office hours. I feel fortunate to be in the life situation I am in while dealing with what is shaping up to be a really crummy 2020 - hell even my neighbor does. That doesnt change the fact that this flat out sucks, and I'm not ashamed to feel that way.

MN just formally issued its stay at home order through 4/10, although it really changes nothing for the majority of us who are already on house arrest. 287 confirmed cases with 26 of them being hospitalized and 1 death. Even more importantly is MN has only identified a handful of community infection cases - the vast majority remain from people returning from international travel and their immediate family living in the same household. The governor keeps saying they are expecting a surge in cases, but it hasn't showed up yet and you can feel the angst from those who have already been holed up for about 2 weeks voluntarily. Teachers are exhausted. We are trying to sort out how to manage elearning for a 1st grade spanish immersion student on outdated iPads while her younger brothers scream at each other playing and my wife and I juggle conference calls between flipping coins for who gets to leave the house to target and drive home with only half the stuff we needed due to supply issues. Also talked with my neighbor this afternoon from an acceptable distance across the yards, who is a brewmaster at a local craft brewery - even with liquor stores somehow remaining on the list of essential businesses (yay lobbying!), he's pretty certain this is the death if the craft beer boom. He is already retraining himself on car repairs because he's certain his owner is gonna have to close their doors no matter what government aid package gets pieced together and spit out scattershot so it doesnt look like a depression on a nationwide scale. He has three young kids and a wife who is having to start work at 3am as a medical biller so she doesnt crash her company's internet during typical office hours. I feel fortunate to be in the life situation I am in while dealing with what is shaping up to be a really crummy 2020 - hell even my neighbor does. That doesnt change the fact that this flat out sucks, and I'm not ashamed to feel that way.

While flattening the curve is truly important, not many admit the US is better prepared for this than most other countries. Here is a quote from an economist I follow. "Meanwhile, a 2013 study by the Department of Health and Human Services determined that the US has the most Intensive Care Unit beds per capita of any country at 20-32 per 100,000 people. This is far higher than China where there are only 2.8-4.6, demonstrating why they needed to build hospitals overnight. Likewise, the US far outdoes countries with socialized medical systems like Canada (13.5), Sweden (5.8-8.7), or the UK (3.5-7.4). This means the US is better suited to deal with the healthcare capacity issues that could arise with a Pandemic than virtually any other country in the world." This is true and a good thing but the US also has far fewer regular hospital beds than the rest of the world (draw your own conclusions about why we have the ICU bed to regular bed ratio that we do. My cynical guess is that it has to do with reimbursement rates) so when someone moves out of ICU they need somewhere else to go. Secondly, for this kind of illness you oftentimes need a special ICU room of which there aren't all that many. https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-hospital-beds-per-capita-us-south-korea-italy-2020-3 Well, I can think of a whole bunch of large empty cruise ships laying around - and empty hotels for that matter - that would be perfect makeshift recovery/isolation hospitals with plenty of beds for those with mild/moderate symptoms not requiring an ICU. Part of the reason the US has so few "regular" hospital beds per capita compared to the rest of the world actually has to do with the quality of care/health system and the fact that in even normal circumstances the best place to be if you want to contract an infectious disease is a hospital - the US hospital system has tried to limit the overall room size of hospitals and spread out the range of care to multiple facilities in other locations - even taking advantage of in-home care given the fact most Americans live in palaces compared to the rest of the world. I also don't really know how assisted living/nursing home facilities are quantified in these # of bed breakdowns - I'm guessing the US has many, many more of those than the rest of the world per capita, of which would all fall under regular hospital beds in my book.

While flattening the curve is truly important, not many admit the US is better prepared for this than most other countries. Here is a quote from an economist I follow. "Meanwhile, a 2013 study by the Department of Health and Human Services determined that the US has the most Intensive Care Unit beds per capita of any country at 20-32 per 100,000 people. This is far higher than China where there are only 2.8-4.6, demonstrating why they needed to build hospitals overnight. Likewise, the US far outdoes countries with socialized medical systems like Canada (13.5), Sweden (5.8-8.7), or the UK (3.5-7.4). This means the US is better suited to deal with the healthcare capacity issues that could arise with a Pandemic than virtually any other country in the world." This is true and a good thing but the US also has far fewer regular hospital beds than the rest of the world (draw your own conclusions about why we have the ICU bed to regular bed ratio that we do. My cynical guess is that it has to do with reimbursement rates) so when someone moves out of ICU they need somewhere else to go. Secondly, for this kind of illness you oftentimes need a special ICU room of which there aren't all that many. https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-hospital-beds-per-capita-us-south-korea-italy-2020-3 Well, I can think of a whole bunch of large empty cruise ships laying around - and empty hotels for that matter - that would be perfect makeshift recovery/isolation hospitals with plenty of beds for those with mild/moderate symptoms not requiring an ICU. Part of the reason the US has so few "regular" hospital beds per capita compared to the rest of the world actually has to do with the quality of care/health system and the fact that in even normal circumstances the best place to be if you want to contract an infectious disease is a hospital - the US hospital system has tried to limit the overall room size of hospitals and spread out the range of care to multiple facilities in other locations - even taking advantage of in-home care given the fact most Americans live in palaces compared to the rest of the world. I also don't really know how assisted living/nursing home facilities are quantified in these # of bed breakdowns - I'm guessing the US has many, many more of those than the rest of the world per capita, of which would all fall under regular hospital beds in my book.

Total death tally is approaching 20,000 worldwide after about two months of the outbreak - now that it's largely worldwide I'd expect that number to quadruple over the next month or so. That sounds like alot but in reality it isn't - however the nature of this virus makes it a fool's errand to try and return to normalcy without properly isolating remaining contagious cells, or it'll just keep blowing up in populated areas. Approaching one thousand US deaths, and it'll go well beyond that. Doubtful it'll be 160 million but I get your larger point even though I think all of us acknowledge its severity at least from its impact globally even without carrying a monumental death toll. It's crazy to me that back in 2009, this was roughly the time in its outbreak when people were kind of like, "man this swine flu thing might be bad, we better wash our hands more."

This disease's hazard is how infectious it is, not its lethality...we will never know how many of the people who die after contracting this would have also been in trouble the next time they got influenza A or some other less infectious but widespread disease. It sucks because many more get infected much quicker with this disease and it overwhelms the health system in hardest hit areas. When there are multiple reports and studies indicating most of those infected with covid-19 probably will never know it because they are asymptomatic, I'm just thankful its target population is not children or those with developing immune systems.

Was wondering this the other day in light of all the Covid madness since he's not the first pitcher planning a procedure when it's looking highly likely we have a dramatically reduced or even lost season....is this actually considered essential surgery at this point in time?

I have heard a ton of planes are being mothballed in various airline hangars until demand picks back up

It may be best to not rely on "confirmed" cases to base any conclusions. There has been an avalanche of information that testing has not kept up with demand due to a shortage of testing kits. The testing shortage is also likely skewed and rural areas may have a 5% chance of getting a test done while urban areas will get preference because the demand is so much higher (if you have 5 tests available are you going to run a test from 1 doctor in Rhinelander or 50 doctors in Milwaukee?). There is one interesting bit of data on that figure: 4 deaths, 1 recovered... Now if you want to believe the data as presented, that's a pretty scary set of numbers. That's mainly because they basically wait 3 full weeks before declaring anyone infected with the disease as recovered once they know a person has it...even if they arent affected by it. Recovered appears to mean not being infectious more than fully healed after experiencing symptoms. Obviously once you die, they ain't waiting that long to update stats.

If what I read correctly that the National Guard is being deployed to some of the hardest hit areas in the country, my hope is that these hot spots (NY, WA, Chicago, LA, etc) receive a much more strict quarantine while the rest of the country manages its way through a more marginal outbreak. Increased testing in the areas not as harshly hit with lower population density will really help keep the whole country from spiraling beyond medical system capacity. If you keep people from leaving the high density population hot spot areas and also keep people from entering them, plus you aggressively test and self-quarantine other population centers to limit rapid spread, the rest of the country can be back up and running by at least some measure a few weeks from now. The US, and frankly the world, needs that to be the case if there's any hope of preventing a global tragedy. I'm assuming farmers are considered essential personnel? Assuming this stretches into April/May, they better damn well be so crops can get planted - even sick people still gotta eat. What happens when a much more populous but largely developing country like India starts having problems with this? The whole continent of Africa? There is so much to the existing supply chain for population centers that simply can't deal with prolonged shutdowns in today's economy, both on a national and worldwide scale. My hope is that this 2-4 week period of "social distancing" can at least weed out which areas are worst hit, so other things can move forward while assistance resources are poured directly to places that really need them instead of spreading them scattershot everywhere. I can see hardcore city wide or perhaps even statewide lockdowns go into effect for a few weeks, but there's no way that can be imposed on a nationwide scale here. China didn't even come close to doing that.

Because it's China producing those numbers and they arent verifiable. They spent over a month trying to cover this thing up or suppress actual cases during its initial outbreak, even temporarily halting testing, until it got beyond their reach and they had no choice but to start reporting some numbers to try and keep the world off their backs. Axios had a great timeline piece of what china did from early december through late january - In a country of 1.5 billion people there is no way their numbers published are anywhere close to accurate. There are countless cases that go undetected by western countries because of testing limitation. Its markedly worse in a country like china, which is much more populated. https://www.axios.com/timeline-the-early-days-of-chinas-coronavirus-outbreak-and-cover-up-ee65211a-afb6-4641-97b8-353718a5faab.html I'd take China's published death toll and multiply it by at least 10, and take their published case toll and multiply it by around 100.

I think three things might be keeping numbers down in Japan. #1 - as a society, their customs shy away from alot of human contact in the day-to-day. Handshakes are rare. They also are a pretty hygenic due to other outbreaks that have wreaked havoc on their county over the years due to their population density. #2 - they have apparently done a good job at identifying clusters of infection and completely isolating them. However I think that's kind of nonsense because it seems like once people realize they are infected it's a few days too late for them to have not passed it to someone else. #3 - since they are hosting the summer olympics their government is pulling out all the stops to keep their infected number down in order to not have to cancel it later this summer - that includes fudging the numbers or limiting testing so the numbers stay artificially lower - pretty much the same thing China did from december through mid-January before they realized it was completely out of their control and they had to lock down the country after it was too late to prevent it spreading worldwide. I'm gonna go out on a limb that seems pretty sturdy based on the past few months and say #1 and #3 are the two biggest reasons their numbers seem very low. Only a matter of time before their numbers rise, unfortunately. However, their health care system is equipped with a ton of capacity compared to other countries, so they may be able to manage this much better than other developed countries without having to shut their economy down.

Assuming anyone believes a single word China says... I'd multiply China's published death toll by 10 and that would probably be more accurate. Apparently the country to live through this in style who really knows how to manage an outbreak is north korea....0 cases!!

Why? We already know who the at risk people are. But we don't know who is carrying it to give it to them. So you restrict contact with the at risk people for a month, hell 3 months, potentially having to quarantine caregivers with them during that time. Then you let the virus run its course though the incredible majority of people it doesnt severely impact during that time without putting the world on house arrest. It sucks, but compared to this it's probably an easier process to implement and actually implement properly.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-undiagnosed-spread.html This study, if even reasonably accurate on a larger scale, would seem to indicate several things which a good number of people probably already know if they are honest with themselves: 1 - The actual number of people who have been infected with the virus to date is much, much higher than the numbers churned out on a daily basis, particularly in highly populated countries with next to no testing protocols for what appears to be the majority of people who simply never become symptomatic. This would indicate the actual denominator is already really quite high. As of this morning there have been over 200K confirmed cases across the world with ~8K Covid-19 - related deaths. Using those two numbers alone gives a death rate of 4%, which is incredibly alarming. Extrapolating the results of the study in the above link even on a conservative basis would multiply the number of infections to roughly 1.2 Million across the globe. Even doubling the deaths to 16,000 to account for unidentified Covid-19 deaths in developing countries would drop the death rate to 1.3%. Sticking with the 8K deaths against 1.2 Million gives it a 0.67% death rate. This estimate actually closely matches the number South Korea has developed for coronavirus after completing what is probably the most rigorous testing program any country has undertaken to date - their figure is a 0.65% death rate. Those numbers are good news, however even that decrease means the disease is markedly more deadly than the run of the mill flu for the disproportionate populations it seems to target with severe cases - primarily because humans don't have any immunity to it and those with fragile health systems don't have the ability to fight it off. 2 - The likelihood that any sort of travel bans or social distancing of general populations of people will lead to preventing this virus from spreading everywhere eventually is unrealistic knowing roughly 80% of the people who get the disease don't ever know they had it in the absence of being tested for it. It can definitely slow the spread, particularly to at risk populations of people, which is what we're attempting to do now to manage the curve for the severe cases that require significant medical attention so the whole system doesn't crash and we see widespread unnecessary death in the elderly and medically fragile populations due to inadequate care/supplies. That's why keeping EVERYONE as isolated as possible for 2-3 weeks is imperative - let the virus work its way through everyone it's already infected. If people who "feel fine" are all out and about interacting with others the next two weeks, odds are pretty much 100% that rate of new infections will remain high and the need for extended isolation and economic pain will be necessary. The other critical item is to expand testing, which should finally start happening this week in some countries. If the US ramps up its testing and gets even a few hundred thousand people tested in their hot spot areas (Washington, New York, Bay Area, Florida, etc), we should get a much better handle on the true denominator and also get a better understanding of how to tailor some of these restrictions to better protect those that have the highest risk of developing a significant case of Covid-19 until documented new cases plummet.

Basically, I just think the return of baseball depends on how much unknown spread we have already seen and how willing MLB is to play under weird circumstances. If MLB only wants to do full go, we are probably talking July. If it is okay with no fans at games, then earlier is possible. For reference, MLB didn't shut down at all during WWII, when a good portion of their regular players joined the armed services (even if most weren't on front lines). There needs to be a season this year, even if the start of it begins with most games being played in Spring Training facilities or empty MLB ballparks. Teams just need to follow the Tampa Rays model of playing in front of social distancing-friendly home crowds. You can easily fit 10,000 fans in parks spaced way more than 6' apart!

At some point we will pass a threshold where damage done by preventative measures outweighs their benefit to the general public. In fact, with some of these bans/restrictions already extended out several months I think we've gone past that threshold already. 2 months ago there were a couple hundred coronavirus cases in China - they've now been statistically stagnant in terms of new cases for more than 2 weeks. Europe, Italy in particular, appears to be in much worse straits with this than the US is. 2 months is far, far too long to go on with basically shutting the country down unless everyone is giddy for another great depression on a worldwide scale. There will surely be hot spots in the US where it hits harder than most and extending social distancing restrictions in those areas may be warranted, but a vast swath of the country will see minimal impact in terms of population well-being due to the virus. People will get the disease, but the death rate will resemble that of the flu. After another week, maybe two of this once the initial impact of how many cases spread stateside from travelers returning from Europe (a vast majority of the US cases have been traced back to people who were in Europe over the last 1-2 months), the country is going to collectively wake up one day and come to the realization that these measures likely limited the spread and were warranted - but they will be chomping at the bit to get them unwound ASAP so life can revert back to some sense of normality.

I'm pretty sure the models definitely overestimate the lethality of something like this, because they are always geared towards a worst case scenario assuming little/no preventative measures are undertaken. In a country like China where there are 1.5 billion people, to only have 80 some thousand cases of a disease this contagius is a joke considering they went weeks and weeks before imposing any sort of social distancing crackdown. I'd guess the actual number of Chinese that were infected with the virus was probably 20 or even 50x that 80,000 number - it's just that the masses that never showed signs or only showed mild symptoms were never tested or ever counted. An exploding denominator of the general population infected coupled with decreasing fatality/hospitalization rates should lead to an adjustment on how governments are quarantining overall populations more quickly than some people are estimating. IMO there should be a push to isolate/protect the elderly and medically fragile populations while gradually phasing things back to normal otherwise. I'm thinking once we are into early April, there's going to be a ton of public pressure to lift many of these restrictions for the general public, if they haven't already started getting lifted.

Disagree a bit about this. I've seen alot of comparisons between initial US response to Swine Flue (H1N1) back in 2009 and Coronavirus this year - If these proactive measures to limit social exposures work and the outbreak is able to be effectively managed, comparison of the sheer numbers between these two outbreaks will be startling. H1N1 killed up to 500,000 people during its first year worldwide, and its target population was actually younger people. 60M in the US got sick from it, and 12,500 died from it. Next to nothing was done worldwide in terms of banning travel, cancelling public gatherings, etc....IMO the biggest reason that was the case is the outbreak came on the heels of the financial crisis which had the entire world in economic hardship - government officials wanted nothing to do with any actions that would be perceived to further damage the economy at that time. All indications are the coronavirus is a highly contagius virus that can wreak havoc on older/medically vulnerable populations if no drastic measures are taken to try and limit its rate of spread. Thankfully, this outbreak comes at a time when the world and more specifically for us the US economy was very strong - so while taking these measures hurts pocketbooks and will likely run the economy into a recession, getting a handle on the disease will inevitably lead to a significant bounceback simply by day-to-day life reverting back to normal. At least from my perspective, seeing the extraordinary measures being taken now makes me even more startled that they weren't taken previously during other new virus outbreaks, and I wonder how many lives could have been spared had better responses been coordinated then.

With regard to the schedule, it all depends on how long the games are postponed for - a two week delay could realistically be made up by playing the regular season into mid October. Remember April is littered with a bunch of extra offdays to make sure teams with outdoor stadiums get home openers. As it stands, a two week regular season schedule delay doesn't mean that pitchers and players can't continue ramping up for the season by throwing/hitting on the side, too. Depending how this progresses, two weeks from not MLB may be able to reopen spring training facilities for players to at least get organized workouts/games in through April 10, then the season could start the week of April 13. If the delay winds up lasting significantly longer, then I think all bets are off in terms of a what a protracted schedule would look like - they may even wind up scrapping the existing schedules to reduce travel and give teams equal opportunities to make the postseason. I'd think interleague games would be first to be eliminated, and they could also keep a heavier scheduling focus on interdivisional matchups, perhaps by adding just one 4 game series with all other NL clubs in other divisions.