Posted Feb 29 2020 at 10.42 amUpdated Feb 29. 2020 at 3:57 p.m.
With the proliferation of Covid-19 outbreaks, can we now speak of a pandemic?
Absolutely. The pandemic meets two criteria. The first is virological. The human race must never have dealt with the virus. This is the case with this coronavirus. The second is geographic. At least two regions of the world must be affected. Asia-Pacific was the only one until last week. Europe is now, as the multiplication of foci of contamination shows
in northern Italy and in France.
However, this is only a question of semantics linked to purely objective criteria. That doesn’t say anything more about this Covid-19, other than that it’s new and traveling.
Is there a precedent analogous to Covid-19?
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, better known as SARS, seems a good basis for comparison. As a reminder, this virus appeared in China, spread to around 30 countries, infected 8,096 people and killed more than 774 worldwide in 2002 and 2003. SARS, like coronavirus today, has alerted the World Health Organization and struck many tourism sectors. The coronavirus stands out for its paralyzing effect not only on tourism and travel, as in 2003, but also on the manufacturing industry in China.
Should we conclude that the Covid-19 has a more severe impact on the economy than SARS?
It is still too early to tell. China’s industrial fabric of 2020 is much more developed than that of 2002-2003 and more integrated into globalization. Let us therefore beware of excessively pessimistic forecasts. When SARS appeared, we believed in a major economic crisis. Some economists anticipated $ 100 billion in costs to the economy. History teaches that it was contained, between 50 and 60 billion, or 2% of the GDP of the Asia-Pacific region at the time.
Was the international community ready to face this Covid-19?
The preparation of health systems is variable. In France, it is certain that we are better off than in Greece, for example. Are we ready? Hard to say at the moment. Are we better prepared? Yes, progress has been made on the medical and health fronts.
The room for improvement is obvious, it is a certainty, in terms of communication. During the SARS epidemic, the communication rule was to say that “everything is fine, we manage, we are ready”. Today, with the coronavirus, communication seems closer to reality. We say what we can do. We also accept the points on which we experience difficulties.
So the French authorities seem to be up to the task.
Yes, overall. Maybe I’ll be out in a few days.
China, for its part, has imposed impressive quarantines on its inhabitants. What does history teach us about these containment measures?
Collective quarantines, that is to say confinement in a closed and guarded perimeter, has demonstrated its ineffectiveness. “Leaks inevitably occur which collapse this defense system”, already declared in 1945 Professor André Lemierre, infectious disease specialist, before the Superior Council of Public Hygiene in France. It also amounts to mixing asymptomatic but contagious people with uninfected and non-contagious populations.
Instead of containing the disease, you are spreading it.
Instead of containing the disease, you are spreading it. Wuhan, the epicenter of the coronavirus in China, is also in this collective quarantine situation. Elsewhere in China, there are individual containment measures, where people stay sealed at home. History shows neither efficiency nor ineffectiveness.
Isn’t there some form of hysteria?
Impossible to say until we have seen the end of the film. Perhaps the fear and the impressive sanitary measures are perfectly justified.
Can fear have aggravating effects?
A very high level of anxiety can cripple the economy. This is probably already the case. Fear can also have a positive effect. If residents are aware of the risk and take their precautions, they reduce the likelihood of being contaminated … or of contaminating.
–
