Obviously, with the outbreak of COVID-19 and the response, there is some discussion on the nature of the virus. When the virus first broke news, many referred to it as a flu-like virus. Now, many insist that calling this virus the flu is inaccurate. But, is it? Part of the trouble with calling this virus a flu-like virus, or calling this virus a bad flu, is the colloquial usage of the word flu. Many use the word flu to describe numerous symptoms that may or may not be related to actual influenza. Simply put, the flu is an upper respiratory viral infection. There are several recognized influenza subtypes and many strains. COVID-19, although not from a known influenza virus, is a flu-like virus because it is also an upper respiratory viral infection. This should not be comforting. Flu-like illnesses can be very dangerous and can cause a host of complications. Why do some think that calling COVID-19 a flu-like virus does not adequately describe the virus? I would argue becau
Pretty much everyone has been affected by the COVID-19 response. There is debate about whether or not we are prepared to deal with a pandemic. We have been told to "flatten the curve" and "help healthcare professionals by staying at home." Only "essential employees" should be working; people should only be out and about for groceries, no groups bigger than 5 to 10 people, etc. There have been clear guidelines. There have been unclear guidelines. Hospitals are working to acquire more supplies, worried about what the pandemic could mean for them and the community when it peaks. Beds, ventilators, isolation PPE. They want to be prepared for the worst. Non-essential or elective surgeries are being postponed. Visitors are being restricted. Healthcare professionals are having their leave rescinded. They are being screened before and after shifts. And, in many places, this is pre-emptive. In other places, especially with very large populations, t