[erentz]

My last sentence is referring to exactly what you're saying, your statement is dangerous and irresponsible because it is designed to make people think SARS-CoV-2 is less dangerous than regular seasonal flu. Comparing annual deaths from an established virus to the current deaths from an emerging virus is on the face of it absurd. You need to compare mortality rates, the rate of spread, and projected infections. You can come back and compare total deaths in two years after it has become endemic everywhere like the flu already is.

If I gave you the choice tomorrow of being infected with this seasons flu or the coronavirus, which would you pick? Hopefully you're smart enough to understand the difference between a 0.1% mortality rate and a 2% mortality rate.

Leading people to believe the flu is more dangerous has slowed (and is still slowing) the response, reducing preparedness, increasing the spread, and as such will have a part to play in loss of life from this virus.

[stolenmerch]

No, the flu is still more dangerous. We're not talking about whether I have the choice of being infected with "this year's strain" or Covid-19. We're talking about risk assessment and realistic chances of catching them. The mortality rate of covid-19 outside Wuhan is 0.7% [1]. In the U.S. it's zero so far. I have a MUCH higher chance of getting influenza and dying where I and most people live. This could change and I certainly reserve the right to modify my preparedness and anxiety appropriately.

Alarmism and panic do far more harm in situations like this than the actual virus itself.

[1]https://www.marketwatch.com/story/coronavirus-update-79339-c...