Talk:2282: Coronavirus Worries

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search

Props to Randall for not mentioning toilet paper ONCE 21:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

He couldn't. There aren't any more toilet paper jokes left! 11:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I heard there are plenty of toilet paper jokes, but people are hoarding them ...Boatster (talk) 13:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

The transcript states that the axis lines do not have arrows on them. It should describe the arrows on labels, i.e. More common with arrow pointing to the right. Rtanenbaum (talk) 23:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

My initial take on the More Healthy axis reflected on the person doing the worrying, that is some worries would be more or less common depending on the health of the person. The explanation interprets More Healthy to refer to the worry itself, that is some worries are intrinsically more healthy than others. I am at a loss to determine which of these interpretations more closely fits the worries that are listed. Rtanenbaum (talk) 23:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

While there are some data points that could fit the "health of the worrier" interpretation (eg a sick person would worry more about how they got a cough, while a healthy person might not even have a cough), I think all of them can fit the "health of the worry" and some of them explicitly do not fit the former. For example a sick person is not less likely to worry that "random people in a news story" are reacting wrong compared to "your government"; and a healthy person is more likely to worry that a lack of rest/hydration will cause them to *get* the virus yet that dot is both low on the "healthy" axis and higher on the "commonality" axis than general concern about rest/hydration. Finally if it was how common the worry was depending on the health of the person then I would expect lines or curves rather than points, since that would better show whether a healthy person is more or less likely to have a worry than a sick person; as it stands they indicate a single value per worry, suggesting that each worry has a definite commonality and health value rather than a dependent relationship. (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
I'm pretty sure this is not about how healthy the worrier is, but about how healthy it is to have that worry. For example, it is healthy to think about drinking enough and getting rest, because that may make you actually do that. However, it is probably not a good idea to worry whether not doing so might increase your risk to get infected, because, while the topic is the same as the first worry, this phrasing suggests a much more panicking kind of worry that might ultimately make you lose your sleep, contradicting your worry in the first place and being detrimental to your health, both physical and mental. The second bunch of worries is similar: Worrying about your own staying at home may make you do so, which is healthy, similar to worrying about your friends and family. Worrying about the government might at least increase the pressure on them to do the necessary action. Worrying about random people reacting wrongly won't get you anywhere but into panic. And finally, for the last two, worrying about your work may not be particularly healthy, but it is not exactly a panic reaction, either. Panicking about every door knob and cough however may be very detrimental to your mental health and even risk your physical health if you leave home in order to get tested which might bring you into contact with people that really are infected. Still not sure whether it is more about the potential threat to your future physical health if you panic or whether it is about what it says about your current mental health if you do. Well, just my two cents. 10:24, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

"with at least eight in a row" -- this is getting hecka tiresome. Surely he can think of _something_ other than the flu 2.0. (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Wouldn't it be interesting if your dismissive "flu 2.0" led you be infected by the Coronavirus.... 01:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
The hole world is only talking about Corona. Any other subject would be dismissed. This was already the topic of the first Coronavirus Name. --Kynde (talk) 18:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Is this the largest run on a single topic in xkcd history?Seebert (talk) 14:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Yes for sure. He has had five comics in a week series, but they never continued later. It is also by now the longest "series", but since this is more a topic than a series, I guess this cannot be called a series. Guess we will have to wait making any final conclusions regarding this until the topic or the virus dies out. --Kynde (talk) 18:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
...or we do? 15:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

For most people in not-at-risk groupings (meaning not elderly, infants, or immuno-compromised), it really isn't that big of a hit to their health. The risk is not that a young/middle-aged person gets sick, the risk is that they spread it to someone who is in an at-risk segment. Nevertheless, people die all the time from the regular flu, and not in trivial numbers. This isn't that much different. More people are going to be hurt much worse from losing their jobs (hospitality, entertainment, service ... and the industries that support them), incomes, and probably homes than would have been from this. (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

The thing is: Covid-19 is currently not a big health risk for most people, because there are strong measures to fight it. Without of those measures it would me much more people affected. Also if you look at Italy: Most people dying there are elderly. Because they do not get sufficient treatment. Why? Because they give the lung machines to younger people instead. --Lupo (talk) 08:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Latest numbers from an estimate done in London is that the United States will lose 4 million people if we do nothing, 2 million if standard social distancing measures work, and if we all go into Wuhan style lockdown once every few weeks for the next 18 months, we'll lose a few tens of thousands per wave. It now appears that getting this thing does NOT spur your immune system to create antibodies against it, so you can potentially get it every wave.Seebert (talk) 14:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Wow[citation needed] for that last statement. --Kynde (talk) 18:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Can I remember how to do a link in this system? I'll do it both ways. [1]

plain text of URL I have attempted to insert above:

hopefully one of those will workSeebert (talk) 19:06, 19 March 2020 (UTC)