The Wuhan coronavirus in China, and other suggested reading

I think I’ll take a day off from looking at Wuhan coronavirus numbers and writing about the pandemic. Instead, I will refer readers to a few articles on the subject.

This one is from Townhall. It reports that an Israeli professor, Yitzhak Ben Israel of Tel Aviv University, has concluded that this virus follows its own pattern, irrespective of social distancing measures. He found that whether the country was quarantined like Israel or went about business like Sweden, the coronavirus peaked and subsided in the exact same way. I’m not endorsing this view, I’m just offering it for your consideration.

Here’s what I consider good news from the Washington Post. According to this report, China’s Wuhan coronavirus charm offensive is backfiring. It’s not just President Trump who’s attacking China for this pandemic. Even nations normally friendly with China, including Iran, have been critical, according to the Post. And naturally, countries like France, Germany, Britain, and Japan are reassessing their reliance on China for critical health and national security-related supplies.

Speaking of China, this report from the American Enterprise Institute estimates the real number of Wuhan conoravirus cases in that nation. It estimates that China has around 2.9 million cases. That’s more than the total number of cases reported worldwide. China itself reports only around 82,000 cases.

Back to the good news. Abbott Laboratories announces that it has developed an immunity test and will ship nearly 1 million of them to U.S. customers before the end of the week. It intends to ship about 4 million tests in April and claims it will be able to produce about 20 million per month by June. The test determines whether someone had the virus (some people have it without knowing) and developed antibodies that protect them from future infections. Policymakers say that such knowledge is a key to understanding the disease and to promoting safety when America starts returning to work.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses