[Steel Wolf]

I wouldn't be too critical of all this. If managed properly, the panic could work out in our favor, and help bring down a brutal regime. </realpolitik>

[ScholarWarrior]

I agree. Notice how cooperative the Chinese will be with North Korea.

They are going to need a lot of respiratory equipment, as well as economic cooperation in the face of zero travel.

And that's difficult to do when your people are rioting.

[JasonC]

Exactly. Panic does not hurt on the only policy issue that matters, which is beating this critter before it ever gets going. If hotels in Hong Kong lose money doing that, tough toenails. As long as people's reactions, over or not, contribute to slowing the spread of the critter instead of furthering it, let 'em overreact.

The rate of infections went linear, then less than linear, in Hong Kong in about a month. That's great, and speaks well of "panic". If we can get the same level of "panic" in China, instead of denial by people worried about economic effects, then we'll clobber this thing before it does any serious damage.

Which is after all the point. Fear or its absence, rationality or its absence, economic side effects or their absence, politics, funding, prestige - none of those are the point. They are ephermal distractions. People focusing instead of reducing its spread by whatever means, have their eye on the ball, and all the quibblers and lecturers do not.