[2020-12-30]在1到10的等级中（10为最高）新冠疫情有多严重？

Steve Baker
This really isn’t something you can put a simple number to.
Suppose we use the numbers in the USA in an effort to establish a scale:
IN THE USA:
* A typical Influenza - (which MOST people would probably call a ‘1’ on the scale) kills between 12,000 and 61,000 people in a year - between 0.004% and 0.02% of the population per year.
* COVID-19 - has (so far) killed 300,000 people in about a year. So about 0.1% of the population.
* Spanish Flu, out of a population of (then) around 100 million - killed about 500,000 people. So about 0.5% of the population in a single year. We should probably give that a ‘10’ because it’s the most serious pandemic in 100 years.
So that would give us COVID being 1/5th as bad as Spanish Flu…a ‘2’ on our scale?

【回答】
这真的不是一个简单的数字。
假设我们使用美国的数据来建立一个量表：
在美国：
* 一种典型的流感（大多数人可能会定为“1”级）每年导致1.2万至6.1万人死亡，占总人口的0.004%至0.02%。
* 新冠疫情，迄今为止，大约一年内杀死了30万人，约占总人口的0.1% 。
* 西班牙流感，在当时约1亿人口中，约有50万人死亡。也就是说，每年大约有0.5%的人口。我们可能应该给它定为10级，因为这是一百年来最严重的大流行。
那么这就意味着我们新冠疫情的死亡人数只有西班牙流感的五分之一，所以我们的是2级？

But is it right to just look at recent pandemics and narrowly at US numbers?
IN EUROPE:
* Influenza rates are comparable to the USA - so that’s still a ‘1’.
* The Black Death killed between 30% and 60% of the population over about 4 years - so very roughly, 8% to 15%…let’s call it 10% - and put that at ‘10’ on our scale.
If that’s a “10” then COVID doesn’t even make an ‘1.5’ on the scale.
IN GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE AND LIBERIA:
Ebola killed 11,300 people over 3 years.
COVID-19 killed 5,200 in Guinea, 1,800 in Liberia and 2,500 in Sierra Leone…so a total of 9,500 people in ONE year.
So someone living there would assign a ‘10’ to COVID and a mere ‘4’ to Ebola.
BUT “RECENTISM”:
There is scarcely anyone left who lived through the Spanish Flu - so should we people of the 21st century even count that at all?

但是，仅仅关注最近的大流行，并只关注美国的数据，这样做对吗？
在欧洲：
* 流感比率与美国相若，所以仍然是“1”级。
* 黑死病在大约4年的时间里杀死了30%至60%的人口，所以粗略的说，8% 至15%... 我们就定为10%吧，在这个量表中是10级。
如果这是10级的话，那么新冠疫情甚至还不到1.5级。
在几内亚、塞拉利昂和利比里亚：
埃博拉病毒在三年内夺去了11300人的生命。
新冠疫情在几内亚杀死了5200人，在利比里亚杀死了1800人，在塞拉利昂杀死了2500人... 所以一年总共杀死了9500人。
所以生活在那里的人会给新冠疫情定为10级，给埃博拉定位4级。
“短视主义”：
几乎没有人经历过西班牙流感，那么我们这些21世纪的人应该把这算在内吗？

If we ignore the Spanish Flu pandemic - then Heart Disease is the most lethal disease in the USA - killing 655,000/year, Cancer kills 600,000 - if we give Heart Disease a ‘10’ and Cancer a ‘9’ - then COVID scores about a ‘5’ out of ten.
BUT “AGEISM”:
Rightly or wrongly, a lot of the spread of COVID has been put down to younger people - who are less likely to die from COVID ignoring the “no partying, wear masks” rules. This is CLEARLY because they rate COVID lower on the scale than the people aged 50 and above who are much more likely to die from it.
So what scale can we use if different people rate the disease differently?
BUT “TERROR LEVEL”:
When we compare the death rates from COVID and Ebola in West Africa - we SHOULD rate COVID much higher than Ebola - but I 100% guarantee that people living far from that area would put Ebola MUCH higher on the scale.

如果我们忽略西班牙流感大流行，那么心脏病是美国最致命的疾病，每年杀死655,000人，癌症杀死600,000人，如果我们给心脏病定为“10” ，给癌症定为“9”，那么新冠疫情大约是“5”。
“年龄歧视” :
不管对错与否，很多新冠病毒的传播都被归咎于年轻人，他们不太可能因忽视“不参加聚会，戴面具”的规定而死亡。这很明显是因为他们对新冠疫情的评分低于50岁及以上的人群，而这些人更有可能死于该疾病。
那么，如果不同的人对疾病的评价不同，我们可以使用什么标准呢？
“恐怖程度” :
当我们比较西非的新冠疫情和埃博拉的死亡率时，我们应该会把新冠疫情的死亡率排得比埃博拉的死亡率高得多的位置上，但是我百分百保证，生活在远离该地区的人们会把埃博拉的死亡率排在更高的级别上。

The reason is (I believe) that if you catch Ebola - you’re very likely to die - but if you catch COVID, it’s much less likely. However, even in places like Guinea where Ebola has struck hard - you’re much more likely to catch COVID but more likely to recover from it.
So should a disease with a low probability of you getting it but a high mortality rate score higher than a disease which spreads like wildfire, but has a 95% recovery rate?
What about AIDS - where only certain groups of people are at risk. A gay, intravenous drug-using, promiscuous male has to put AIDS further up the scale than a straight, non-drug-addicted woman who is in a stable relationship.
Their fear level is predicated by their risk levels again - and we don’t have a one-size-fits-all scale.
SHOULD IT EVEN BE A LINEAR SCALE?

原因是(我相信)如果你感染了埃博拉病毒，你很有可能会死亡，但是如果你感染了新冠病毒，这种可能性就小得多了。然而，即使在像几内亚这样埃博拉病毒肆虐的地方，你也更有可能感染上新冠病毒，但也更有可能从中恢复过来。
那么，一种患病概率很低但死亡率很高的疾病，是否应该比野火般传播但却有95%的康复率的疾病排名更高呢？
那么艾滋病呢？只有特定的人群处于危险之中。一个静脉注射毒品，滥交的同性恋男性和有稳定关系，异性恋，不吸毒的女人相比，前者肯定会把艾滋病放在一个更高的排名。
他们的恐惧程度再次取决于他们的风险水平，我们没有一个一刀切的标准。
它应该是线性标尺吗？

Sied Talebinejad former Freelancer, self-employed, web development
9 if you have an awful immune system or you're likely vulnerable to any kind of disorder or disease for that matter…
9 if you're an elderly person since many of them are suffering from the above
1 if you're a younger person or even middle age as long as you're born healthy like the majority of usually are, and avoid drinking, smoking, eating way too much junk food and processed food and exercise regularly or at least try to. Basically, you try to lead a normal healthy life, so you have nothing to worry about.
It's pretty pathetic that in American society people treat this virus as if it's the bubonic plague. The majority of us want to get on with our ordinary lives and here we have politicians scaremongering and overexaggerating the situation to instill fear, panic and feelings of helplessness to bring people under their exploitive control. First BLM, now this nonsense…

【回答】前自由职业者，个体户，网络开发
如果你的免疫系统很糟糕，或者你可能容易受到任何疾病或疾病的影响的话，是9。
如果你是一个老年人，他们中的许多人都遭受以上痛苦的话，是9。
如果你是一个年轻人，甚至是中年人，只要你像大多数人一样健康地出生，并且避免饮酒、吸烟、避免吃太多的垃圾食品和加工食品以及经常锻炼，或者至少尝试这样做。基本上，你试着过一种正常健康的生活，所以你没有什么可担心的。是1。
在美国社会，人们把这种病毒当作黑死病来对待，真是可悲。我们中的大多数人都想继续我们的日常生活，而现在却有政客们在危言耸听和过度夸大局势，以灌输恐惧、恐慌和无助感，将人们置于他们的剥削控制之下。先是黑命贵，现在又是这些胡说八道...

The majority of my family members and close friends who got it were fine. They survived as annoying as it was. I even know a few people with preexisting health conditions who survived it and it wasn't as bad as they had originally feared. It's going to vary obviously person to person, body to body, but I'm sick and tired of Western idiots who try to scaremonger and advocate for shutting down the economy when millions of jobs are at stake.
In China and most of Asia, people have moved on with their lives and solved the problems immediately, whereas in the US politicians on both side of the debate intentionally help spread the disease. Moreover, in some nations like Iran, the people have chosen to ignore scaremongering of politicians regarding the virus and very few actually became ill and despite China, Iran, Italy, Spain among others suffering from the virus during the initial outbreak, the number of sick people and deaths have been proportionally fair and normal compared to what we're witnessing in the US
People need to stop panicking and worrying. Instead, wear a mask when in front of strangers and coworkers, social distance for the moment being, continue going to school, college, work and like we've historically have always been doing. Shutting down an entire economy is incredibly irrational and barbaric. How does starving to death solve the issue? It doesn't!

我的大多数家庭成员和亲密的朋友都得了这种病，他们都很好。虽然很烦人，但还是活了下来。我甚至认识一些已经存在健康问题的人，他们幸存了下来，而且并不像他们最初担心的那样糟糕。这种情况因人而异，但是我已经厌倦了那些西方的白痴，他们试图在数百万工作机会岌岌可危的情况下散布恐慌，鼓吹封锁经济。
在中国和大多数亚洲国家，人们继续他们的生活，并立即解决了问题，而在美国，双方争论的政治家都在故意帮助传播这种疾病。此外，在像伊朗这样的一些国家，人们选择忽视政客们关于病毒的危言耸听，很少有人真正生病，尽管中国、伊朗、意大利、西班牙等国在最初的疫情爆发期间受到病毒感染，但与我们在美国目睹的情况相比，病人和死亡人数在比例上是公平和正常的。
人们需要停止恐慌和担忧。取而代之的是在陌生人和同事面前戴上口罩，暂时保持社交距离，继续上学，上大学，工作，就像我们以前一直做的那样。封锁整个经济体是非常不理性和野蛮的。饿死怎么能解决这个问题？不可能！

Mike Brant Retired Geezer
I’d rate it at an 9, currently. I answered this question months ago, and I’m increasing my level of concern.
It is becoming clear to me that because we are deep in this medical crisis, the medical community is utterly focused on acute symptoms - on keeping patients alive - and completely unable to deal with the fact that this virus can test negative and somehow still be wreaking havoc. While this might be a failure of the testing, which is usually a nasopharyngeal swab after all, and not a blood test

【回答】退休老人
目前我给它打了9分。几个月前，我回答了这个问题，现在我正增加我的关注程度。
我越来越清楚地认识到，由于我们深陷于这场医疗危机之中，医学界完全专注于急性症状，维持病人的生命，而完全无法面对这样一个事实，即这种病毒可能检测为阴性，还以某种方式在造成严重破坏。虽然这可能是检测的失败，毕竟通常是鼻咽腔拭子，而不是血液检测。

Jeffrey Werbock musician, lecturer
It’s hard to know what you are actually asking; by “serious” do you mean medically, socially, economically, psychologically? Let’s take medically serious first. For those who get infected, there seems to be a small but significant minority who get really sick from it then recover, an even smaller but still significant minority seem to have long term symptoms and this is referred to as long covid-19. An even smaller but still quite significant minority die from this new disease. I think that is pretty serious even before we compare those stats to some other disease. The most serious cases which entail long covid-19 and death appear to be caused by blood clots. A lot of microscopic blood clots in the lungs will mimic life threatening pneumonia and can kill by triggering a cytokine storm that causes the victim to drown in their own fluids.
Socially it is pretty devastating as you read reports on the misery inflicted by the lockdowns and the damage done to relationships, careers, friendships and mental health. Economically, probably you know as much as anyone the damage already done and yet to be done by this epidemic. Psychologically we are all living with a new fear. Pretty serious, I would say. Is it as serious as climate change? Water / soil / air pollution? Nuclear war? Big asteroid? No. But it is, statistically, much worse than the earthquake of Dec 26, 2004 that killed a quarter million in southeast Asia.

【回答】音乐家，讲师
很难知道你实际上在问什么；你所说的“严重”是指医学上、社会上、经济上、心理上的吗？让我们先谈谈医学上的严重问题。对于那些被感染的人来说，似乎有一小部分但很重要的是少数人真的因为感染而患重病然后康复了，甚至更少但很重要的是少数人似乎有长期的症状，这被称为长期新冠肺炎。死于这种新疾病的人数甚至更少，但仍然相当多。我认为这很严重，即使在我们将这些数据与其他疾病相比较之前。肺部的大量微小血凝块会模拟危及生命的肺炎，并且可以通过引发细胞因子风暴，从而导致受害者溺死在自己的体液中。
从社会角度来说，当你阅读关于封锁带来的痛苦以及对人际关系、事业、友谊和心理健康造成伤害的报告时，这是相当具有破坏性的。在经济上，你可能和其他人一样知道这场疫情已经造成的破坏和尚未造成的破坏。心理上，我们都生活在一种新的恐惧中。我会说，非常严重。