Although I said I would no longer write daily updates about the Wuhan coronavirus (now officially called SARS-CoV-2), I feel that now is a good time to talk about how a potential global pandemic could impact the still-nascent virtual reality market.
The world may be facing a situation not encountered in 102 years, when the 1918/1919 Spanish influenza pandemic swept around the globe in three successive waves in 18 months (in an era before commercial air travel), infecting one third of the world’s population and killing over 50 million people, more than the total number who died in World War I.
Residential lockdowns of varying strictness — from checkpoints at building entrances to hard limits on going outdoors — now cover at least 760 million people in China, or more than half the country’s population, according to a New York Times analysis of government announcements in provinces and major cities. Many of these people live far from the city of Wuhan, where the virus was first reported and which the government sealed off last month.
Humanity has no natural immunity to this coronavirus (despite the hucksters taking advantage of the situation to sell you various “immunity boosters”). There is no vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, and there will not be one for at least a year. The World Health Organization has already stated that existing pneumonia vaccines are useless against the specific kind of pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2.
In other words, you really can’t prepare your body for this infection. It is true that some people seem to have very light or no symptoms at all (but are still able to infect others). The virus appears to be deadlier to older people, overweight people, and people with pre-existing health conditions, such as asthma and diabetes. (In other words, I am a sitting duck.)
Researchers are still trying to calculate the infectiousness (R0 or R-naught) and case fatality rate (CFR) of this new viral outbreak, and experiments with various treatment options are currently being conducted on infected patients to see what works and what doesn’t. However, all the preliminary reports suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 is about as easily transmissible as the regular, seasonal influenza we see every year.
As an interim measure, it is possible (some would say, likely) that we will begin to see the same kind of social distancing and quarantine policies currently seen in China being implemented by governments around the world. Travel between countries has already been and will continue to be negatively impacted. Major international conferences, such as the Mobile World Conference, are already being cancelled.
All of the preceding discussion is merely preamble to the point I am trying to make: that a potential pandemic will both help and hurt virtual reality.
How will a potential coronavirus pandemic help VR?
I believe that this truly unprecedented combination of circumstances might actually drive more people to embrace virtual reality technology and social VR platforms as a way to safely attend conferences, training sessions, and other events, where it is not physically possible due to pandemic quarantines and social distancing policies. In other words, more people will be exposed to VR, and sooner than predicted, due to the impact of SARS-CoV-2.
This situation might even lead to a boom in the use of various social VR platforms (and perhaps even non-VR virtual worlds such as Second Life). We will probably begin to see many more conferences held partly or completely in virtual reality, such as this week’s Educators in VR 2020 International Summit, where presenters and attendees can share ideas and mingle without the worry of being exposed to an infectious virus!
How will a potential coronavirus pandemic hurt VR?
Many factories have shut down production of goods in mainland China, where many of the computer gadgets we use everyday are manufactured. While a potential pandemic might strengthen demand for VR headsets, it might also make it much harder to get your hands on one.
So, the coronavirus is a double-edged sword with respect to virtual reality.
Good Sources of Information on SARS-CoV-2
Here is my updated list of good, credible, authoritative resources to learn more about the Wuhan coronoavirus (formerly called 2019-nCoV and now officially called SARS-CoV-2; the disease the virus causes is now called COVID-19):
P.S. Effective today, I have created a new blogpost category called Virtual Reality (General), under which I will put those blogposts that talk about VR in a general way that don’t fit under a more specific existing category. I will try to go back and add this category to older blogposts, but obviously, at 1,700 blogposts written to date, I can’t go back and do them all!
Hi, this is Ryan. Remember me? I’m Sansar’s overly attached (ex-)girlfriend:
Yes, I can laugh about it, today. But only because I’ve also had a really good cry about it this week. By all reports, the Sansar project is struggling, and I’m still feeling devastated and upset at the news.
The backlash to my blogpost about the second round of layoffs (including a fair share of hate messages), triggered a downward spiral where I landed up spending a good chunk of this week lying in bed, in a black pit of depression out of which I am only now starting to crawl.*
Ryan took a lot of heat for that blog post — some from Sansar Discord account holders. He followed with an apology and last night he stated that he was closing his blog.
I can’t say that I applaud his blogging methodology; it certainly wasn’t responsible journalism. Ryan has stated (via Discord) that he is not a journalist, only a blogger. But that isn’t cutting it with me. We are ALL responsible for what we say and what we do — as well as the manner in which we do it. That being said, the “facts” put forth in his article have not been officially refuted as of this writing and I have publicly defended him on that count. That same public — and especially the people in Sansar — do have a right to know what is going on. I hope that Ryan rethinks his position on closing.
Yes, I have indeed rethought my position on shutting down this blog. I have been heartened by the small outpouring of support and encouragement I have received this week from numerous people, including one very well-timed pep talk from Lorelle VanFossen, blogging evangelist and organizer of the Educators in VR group, when I was ready to pull out of speaking at their upcoming conference. (Thanks, Lorelle.) The overwhelming message I got back was that people did not want to see me stop blogging. So I won’t.
And, of course, Chic is absolutely correct. Whether or not I call myself a journalist is beside the point; what matters is how I do my job as a blogger, and I made several grievous errors in judgement this week. I rushed to publish a story without taking into consideration its potential impact to Sansar users, Sansar content creators, and Linden Lab employees. I should have reached out to Linden Lab for a comment before publishing the story, particularly to double-check that Sansar was indeed shutting down (as I had originally, and erroneously, reported).
I fucked up royally, and I’m sorry.
I realize now that I have an obligation to you, my blog readers, to get the facts of the story correct, and to provide as many different perspectives as possible in covering that story. I know that many of you come to this blog to get your news about social VR, virtual worlds, and the metaverse—I now get between 600 and 6,000 views per day—and I have a duty to use that growing power and influence responsibly. This is not just a hobby blog, not any longer. I am a journalist, whether I like it or not.
And my talk next Saturday at the Educators in VR conference will be slightly different from what I originally planned. The moderators have given me permission to talk about whatever I like, so in addition to speaking about social VR and libraries, I will also share some lessons learned the hard way in my two-and-a-half years of writing this blog. Think of it as two talks for the price of one!
And I will slowly be easing back into blogging over the next two weeks. I still think that I need to take a break, but of course the world does not stop. February 20th, 2020 will see both the official public launch of Decentraland and the relaunch of version 2.0 of Somnium Space, for example. I will try to report on various news and events as they happen.
And thank you to all the people who did reach out to me, to express their concern, constructive criticism, encouragement, wisdom, unbiased third-party perspective, and support. Sometimes it takes a crisis to find out who your friends and supporters are, and it would appear I have many that I did not realize I had gained over the past 2-1/2 years. So from the bottom of my heart, thank you.
I’ll be all right. The blog will continue.
*It didn’t help matters that, over the past three weeks, I had taken on the extra burden of blogging daily updates about the Wuhan coronavirus (also known as 2019-nCov and then COVID-19), in an effort to get people to begin to prepare for a potential global pandemic. I worked and worried myself into an anxious, doom-porn-addicted, stressed-out mess, and as a result I took this blog into a very weird tangent that confused a lot of my regular readers. Lesson learned. I’m sorry.
I will leave the pandemic advice and counsel to the many experts out there. I don’t need to become the world’s self-appointed saviour from this coronavirus. (As some of my sassy gay friends would tell me: “Get off the cross, honey. People need the wood.” 😉 )
Note: As I promised in this update to my most recent blogpost, here is a very timely guest editorial by Galen, someone who was a very active content creator and programmer in Sansar. We agreed that, under the circumstances, it would be better to publish this guest editorial sooner rather than later.
Given my frankly codependent three-year relationship history with Sansar (and yes, codependent is the most apt word I would use to describe it), I think it best that I step back completely from writing about Sansar, or rejoining the official Sansar Discord. However, I will make my blog available to other writers like Galen who wish to write guest blogposts—editorial or otherwise—about Sansar. (I do reserve my rights as blog owner to veto any blogpost submissions I consider unsuitable.)
All the images used to illustrate this guest editorial were taken and submitted by Galen.
The future of Sansar
A Guest Editorial by Galen
Sansar is dead. Everyone else was afraid to say it. So I’ll say it. And there it is.
No. I’m not an insider. Yes. I’m speculating. Take this editorial as the opinion of someone who has been on the outside for a while now.
“Congratulations! You’ve been selected to be among the first to create social VR experiences with Sansar.” That’s how the July 6th 2017 email to me began. I spent a few thousand dollars ordering a fast gaming PC and an HTC Vive. I set up my account and logged in as soon as I got those delivered and configured. Within a couple days I had my first door opener script in the store as a freebie. I quickly built a little scripting empire with loads of freebies and eventually for-sale products. Not to mention doing countless hours of free mentoring and paid consulting. I met some of the most talented 3D artists ever. I couldn’t believe how much talent was already there before I even arrived for the closed beta.
I knew about the other social VR worlds emerging. I dabbled a little. I specifically chose Sansar. Why? Because Linden Lab. They got virtual worlding right with Second Life. Many people mistakenly believe SL was first and so nobody else could compete later. This could not be further from the truth. There were quite a few successful virtual worlds available and even popular before SL wiped them all away. Let’s not forget Active Worlds. They were 10 years ahead of SL. Yet people migrated from AW to SL in droves in the early years. Why? Simple answer is that SL was better. I had lots of reasons to believe Linden Lab would do social VR better because they had the experience and knew the formula.
But did they? Was I the only person who was bothered that the majority of the Sansar team seemingly had little experience creating or maintaining Second Life? More than a few I talked to had barely visited SL. They were starting fresh. They might as well have been a new company competing with SL without the benefit of all that experience. Which it seems is effectively what they were.
And now it seems they’ve fired most of the Sansar team. Few lessons learned on the way in. Few lessons learned on the way out. This is how it looks to me.
I spent a lot of time defending LL in their decision making regarding Sansar. By the time I left in late 2018 I was done defending them. I still sympathize with everyone though. I like Ebbe Altberg, LL’s CEO. I like all the LL staff I met. Many of whom helped me in my own projects. I certainly like and respect the many friendly and talented residents of Sansar. Most of the early adopters seem to have fled like I did. I respect everyone who poured tons of passion and money into Sansar like I did. We did what we could to make Sansar a success in hopes that Sansar would propel us on to something amazing. And enduring.
So what went wrong? Lots of people have expressed differing opinions. I can’t address all of them. I’ll examine a few of them broadly. But I want to focus on my own. I have a solid idea of what I think went wrong. And a solid idea of what I think LL should do going forward. They can profit from Sansar yet.
So why do I think Sansar is dead? As far as I can tell LL has eliminated its Sansar development team. As with most business ventures, if Sansar is not moving forward then Sansar is moving backward. This is the same move High Fidelity made shortly before shutting down their project. LL most likely will not shut down their servers anytime soon. It probably doesn’t cost them much to store all the experiences we created. As I write this there are only 16 publicly visible instances active with visitors. That shouldn’t cost very much in AWS fees. So there’s no real reason for LL to shut down its functional system. Nor thus to announce an actual end to Sansar.
But now Sansar is a zombie. It seems to be on autopilot. Maybe a few people left to maintain it. And probably a few other people to continue preparing for some planned official events. Again, this is my speculation.
If Sansar is not really dead then why stop development? Because it has failed to thrive. It’s that simple. LL put a lot of money and effort into creating and promoting Sansar. But it did not take off. Not like Second Life did. Not even close.
So why did the one succeed and not the other? Lots of explanations have been floated. Most of the ones I’ve heard revolve around technical deficiencies. The avatar isn’t very sophisticated or customizable. You can’t work together on building a scene. You need a beefy computer to run Sansar. And it has to be a PC. As a software engineer I can sympathize with how frustrating these sorts of complaints can be. But I don’t think they were ever the fundamental problem. Why not? Because SL would never have taken off by this same reasoning. The technical platform wasn’t really better than some of its competitors who had many years’ head start on SL. And it was very buggy in the early years, even after its explosion in popularity.
One thing SL had in those early days was a bold and innovative development team. Philip Rosedale led a freewheeling process that churned out big new features every week, it seemed. They were never finished. They were buggy. And they were cool. That had changed by late 2007. A new management team and process traded limber speed coding for cumbersome quality engineering. This wasn’t all bad. They managed to mostly end the grey goo attacks. And many other forms of griefing. They tightened up a lot of loose nuts and bolts. But they also brought the rapid pace of feature development to a near halt.
I think LL brought that same dreary spirit of sluggish development to its bold new experiment in Sansar. They had such a good starting point. But can anyone really say that they thought the slow drip of minor feature updates was anything like SL’s early days? Were we really better off with timid releases that had fewer bugs than we were with a gusher of crazy experiments that regularly crashed sims and clients in SL’s heyday? I know a lot of creators and users of Sansar complained about bugs when we found them. But I think this is a little shortsighted of us. They didn’t hinder SL’s growth at all. They shouldn’t have hindered Sansar’s either.
I’ve argued many times that commerce was the real driver of Second Life’s success. It’s one thing to offer someone a product they like. It’s another to offer them a product they can profit from. Whether with money, prestige, or any other thing. Second Life introduced the ability for creators to govern how their creations are used through permissioning. And they created a frictionless currency that eventually enabled creators to exchange their earned lindens for US dollars and some other real-world currencies. In my opinion nothing was more important than this set of innovations.
Yes Sansar eventually had these features. Kinda. Sorta. They even introduced an innovative mechanism for creators to earn ongoing royalties as downstream creators sold their incorporated components. But in my opinion they simply failed in this critical area. They were slow to introduce the sansar dollar currency. They took way too long making it so you could directly pay people in sansars. And as far as I can tell they still have not made it possible for users to pay scripted in-world machines for services. Like paying for an hour in an amusement park. Or paying a tip jar at a concert that splits revenue with the house. And they haven’t enabled scripts to pay those machines or pay into users’ accounts directly. Like auto-payment of recurring fees like rent. Or wages for employees.
I don’t think I can really blame Linden Lab for this. I don’t think LL would be allowed to create the linden currency and its market in today’s regulatory environment. They shut down the alternative currency exchanges in part to comply with stricter banking regulations that emerged ostensibly to combat money laundering and other ills. This is probably the main reason LL was so slow in introducing the Sansar dollar and in making it easy to use. This is almost certainly a significant factor influencing other virtual worlds. It may well be why High Fidelity opted for a quasi-independent cryptocurrency. Not strictly owning the transaction ledger probably exempted them from SEC reporting requirements. This could be what’s stalling VRChat’s virtual economy too. In this sense Second Life is grandfathered into something that can’t be easily built from scratch today.
It doesn’t help that the Sansar dollar is not at all frictionless as a currency. They charge a lot to buy Sansar dollars. They charge a lot to sell Sansar dollars. They charge a lot to buy things with Sansar dollars. They charged a lot to give the gift of Sansar dollars. (It seems they eliminated this fee eventually.) I spent a lot of time defending LL’s need to profit from their platform. And I understand why it would be hard to introduce or increase fees later in time. But I think it is impossible to overstate how important the nearly frictionless (and fee-less) use of lindens is to SL’s ongoing success. Hundreds of millions of US dollars in perhaps billions of annual transactions attests to it.
CORRECTION: It seems my information is old. Apparently LL no longer takes a cut from from gifts. It seems they only now charge for store sales, cashing out, and for transferring from your USD balance to PayPal.
The inability of people to easily use their lindens to buy things in Sansar is arguably one of the other opportunities LL missed. I’m sure plenty of the creators in SL who dabbled in Sansar would have gladly spent some of their SL-earned capital in Sansar if they could. But let’s expand the scope of this. It makes way more sense when you realize that many of those same creators really wanted an easy way to bring their creations into Sansar. And many regular users wanted to port their inventories. I’m not going to argue that this would have been easy to implement. In fact I argued early on that this was a bad idea for many reasons. Sansar was its own new thing. It deserved a clean break from the downsides of SL’s old technology. And intellectual property owners in SL deserve a say in whether their goods can be ported anywhere else.
But I think it’s time to reconsider this idea. If Sansar is dead then Linden Lab needs to decide what to do with its development budget going forward. Exactly who didn’t come to Sansar? Why, Second Lifers. Who were looking for Second Life 2.0. Which they were told Sansar was not. So it’s obvious what they want. They want SL 2.0. They almost got it in High Fidelity. But LL is uniquely positioned to do this the right way. It’s a compromise way. Something between the clean break of Sansar and the tepid development path SL has been on for over a decade now.
The heart of my proposal is to create a new technology platform and brand it as Second Life 2. The critical thing to do differently from the Sansar project is to make it so it is at least somewhat compatible with SL. The most crucial thing to share is users’ identities. Followed by their bank accounts. No separate accounts. All the same as now. Everything else is negotiable. This should not be.
Next up would be the grid. SL2 would exist within the same space as SL1, the current grid. I don’t necessarily mean that an SL2 sim would have to be exactly 256 meters squared like SL1’s sims. One option would be for them to be some multiple of that size. For example a 1024 x 1024 SL2 sim would occupy 4 SL1 sim slots. The SL1 grid would need some upgrades to be compatible and to make it relatively easy for users to cross from one grid to the other. And maybe a better option is just to punt by creating some sort of grid-to-grid teleport system. The SL2 grid can be like a parallel world where you simply cannot “see” across the divide. Or maybe only through specially designed portal windows/doors. That sort of wizardry can be created down the road and wouldn’t be required on day one. The only critical requirement is that a user can travel fairly easily between SL1 and SL2 sims.
What about avatars? Do they need to be the same? I would argue that they shouldn’t be. The avatar that Sansar had introduced wasn’t all that bad. It had quite a few solid innovations. And it was arguably easier to dress up than SL’s arcane mess is today. Maybe this would be worth starting over with lessons learned from SL and Sansar too. Maybe some sort of hybrid that would allow skins and some other avatar assets from SL1 to be ported to SL2. Or not. I do believe that SLers will tolerate the fact that they have to create and outfit new avatars in the new grid. I think this initial irritation will be far from a deal-breaker for them. In fact it will likely spur a whole new fashion race to cater to SL2 without killing the SL1 fashion industry. Spend some time developing the basis for this. Don’t hack this part.
One dubious design choice in SL is that there is effectively no limit to how computationally expensive an avatar can get. I proposed in Sansar to introduce a mesh complexity budget to allow users to have as many mesh clothing attachments as they wish by balancing how rich each attachment is against what else they wish to wear. I recommend something similar for SL2 avatars. If they go over that budget they start paying fees for the extra weight. And SL2 sim owners should be able to limit entry of avatars based on their complexity.
What about VR and all the visual glitz of Sansar? Yes! Definitely. Do it. I think almost everyone agreed that Sansar looked great. Just don’t do it at the expense of the live editing experience. I know there are lighting and other optimizations that come from compiling a scene in Sansar. There is an easy compromise though. Selectively bypass or even disable those optimizations during building. Do background compilation as the scene gets updated. If SL users can understand progressive loading of sims then they can understand progressive baking of lighting and sound optimizations. And that’s another thing. Let’s accept that users want to start interacting with scenes as soon as possible. Progressive loading may have downsides for some use cases. But whole-scene loading has way more downsides for many casual uses. This is something you can have both ways though. It should not be hard to develop a progressive loading scheme that’s based on distance to the viewer. Things nearby load first. Then things slightly farther away. And so on. They’ll likely feel more like it’s loading faster. And then you could also allow SL2 sim owners to decide which of the two modes they prefer to require visitors to enter via. SL does have some prioritization to its loading order but it’s not strictly distance-from-you oriented.
One of Sansar’s most elegant features is its on-demand loading of scenes on the server side. I recommend that SL2 sims follow this model. Allow sim owners to decide whether to pay a premium for always-on service if they wish. But otherwise allow empty sims to auto-unload after a while of disuse. Make it owner-configurable how long that timeout period is. And have those sim owners pay only for active time.
One interesting possibility for SL2 sims would involve a radically different notion of what a parcel is. Let’s say you have land leased in large square units like in SL1. But let’s say when you parcel that off into smaller chunks you are really creating separate sims. The equivalent of whole scenes in Sansar. Each parcel-sim would run on its own processor just like a scene in Sansar. But you’d still be able to see that parcel as part of a larger property. The owner of that larger property could charge the parcel owner rent for the privilege of being included in their valuable neighborhood.
One problem with sims that don’t stay online 24/7 comes when you are in one sim and the neighboring one is offline. What do you see in that case? Although it’s not perfect here is one proposal. Every sim gets stored as a model already. In SL1 sims they are dynamic. In SL2 they could be static models. When you are in one SL2 sim you could look out far into the distance and see potentially hundreds of scenes on sims (parcels) that are currently offline. How? By having your client access the static models of those sims instead of trying to talk to active neighboring sims the way SL works now. Those sims’ models can be stored in different level of detail (LOD) versions to suit their apparent size to the viewer.
This is all heady stuff. Lots of coding work to do some of the above. One option is to just go with separate scenes like in Sansar for the first release of the SL2 grid and evolve more integrated approaches over time. Again, SLers will tolerate this just fine.
Practically speaking, the SL2 model is going to require a hybrid SL client that contains both SL1 and SL2 codebases. The Firestorm client has managed to keep pace with and largely outcompete the main client from LL. So I imagine that team would do just fine in collaboration as the SL core team develops the early prototype client.
Should SL2 require a high end gaming machine? Or be dumbed down to work well with older machines? I don’t think it has to be dumbed down. But probably the best answer is to let users decide how far they want to go with their computing hardware. The budget-conscious user who just wants to hang out with friends could ramp down the graphics settings to suit their old machines. And power users could ramp the settings all the way up for their photo shoots and VR applications. Over time most users will gradually adopt more performant machines to enjoy all of SL at its best.
So why bother doing this SL2 stuff in the first place? The answer is simple. The goal should be to phase out SL1 over time. SL1 and SL2 would likely coexist for quite a few years. The SL2 grid would start out as a curiosity to many. And a promising place to try new artistic and business endeavors. Especially if the SL2 grid is truly VR capable. Think of these parallel grids as analogous to how SL has both voice and text-chat modes. Many users exclusively favor one or the other. Some use both interchangeably. No doubt the same will be true for the parallel SL1 and SL2 grids. But if most of the new development is focused in SL2 then most people will gradually spend most of their time there. Most won’t even notice the gradual change in their behaviors.
But again, why bother doing this? Why not just keep upgrading SL as it is today? This editorial is already too long so I won’t go into detail. I’ll just say that SL is held back by some of its early design decisions. Most of them made lots of sense in the early days. And now they weigh SL down. The bottom line of those choices is that they keep SL somewhat expensive for many users. They require LL to maintain an overly large hardware investment. They limit designers’ choices. They keep SL looking a bit cartoonish. They prevent many realtime gaming dynamics. They prevent VR adoption. They make it difficult for larger corporations to form to bring ever more grand creations into existence. In short the technical limits are holding SL back.
I and some others have argued that LL made a mistake by not allowing Sansar to have adult content and activities. This would be another benefit of building a parallel SL2 grid. LL would not have to introduce different rules for both grids. The existing culture of SL should be allowed to flourish in the same way in SL2 as it comes online. I know that stuff may scare away some media companies with deep pockets and an aversion to anything more risque than Toy Story. But it’s also apparent that if LL actually banned adult content from SL then SL would immediately vaporize. It’s an important part of SL’s success.
And more generally it is Second Life’s residents who have made SL such a success. Most of them have been unhappy with the overall feeling that Sansar was a waste at best and a betrayal at worst. I think they are shortsighted in this. But there it is. Their opinions matter. I’m convinced that developing a Second Life 2 grid as a parallel to the current grid and allowing users to be themselves in both is a recipe for success. And not just in keeping SL afloat in the stagnant growth pattern it seems to have held for over a decade. This would very likely make SL flourish anew. This would be a real success for social VR. This would be what brings many of the SL refugees that populate VRChat back home.
I know I’m an outsider at this point. But I haven’t completely abandoned my wish to see Sansar succeed. I was actually hoping to create a virtual presence for my science fiction stories in Sansar. I was hoping there might be more opportunity for me to return someday to do so much more. But that’s probably not going to happen now.
There’s so much more I’d like to say. But this is a start for me. And hopefully it encourages a bigger discussion. I think it’s time to admit that Sansar is dead. But Second Life is alive and well. And ready for an SL2 project. One that respects the current investment hundreds of thousands of people still have in SL today. A couple years ago I didn’t think I’d be the one to say this. But I’ve changed my mind.
Yesterday, both the U.K. and French governments warned their citizens against travel to China, and advised their citizens already in the country to leave. Canada is now also officially advising Canadian citizens against travel to the whole of China, not just Hubei province (at the 2:18 point of the press conference below), as well as asking those Canadians within the country to leave China as soon as possible:
We can expect to see more such declarations by other nations about travel to and from China, but it remains to be seen whether or not such serious measures will have any significant impact on the spread of the 2019-nCoV virus. Most experts are saying it’s too late to contain the virus.
Just a couple of weeks ago, scientists held out hope the new coronavirus could be largely contained within China. Now they know its spread can be minimized at best, and governments are planning for the worst.
“It is not a matter of if—it is a matter of when,” said Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security and a spokesman for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. “There is not a doubt this is going to end up in most countries eventually.”
Total containment isn’t in the cards, said Nancy Messonnier, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “Given the nature of this virus and how it’s spreading, that would be impossible. Our goal is to slow this thing down.”
Measures taken in the U.S. have been criticized in China, where officials said the Americans are stoking fear and overreacting. The CDC responded that it has no choice. The infection is spreading rapidly and humans have no protection against it, Messonnier said. While most cases appear to be mild, the worry is that it will spread to a large number of people and turn deadly in those most vulnerable.
“This is an unprecedented situation and we are taking aggressive measures,” she said. “We are preparing as if this were the next pandemic.”
Despite all the colossal efforts to contain the virus, scientists are quietly preparing for a grim — and increasingly likely — outcome: A full-blown global pandemic.
Since the novel virus was isolated in December in the Chinese megacity of Wuhan, the pathogen has reached four continents and infected more than 24,000 people. At least 493 of them have died as a result. With the outbreak continuing to expand, authorities acknowledge that efforts will soon shift from trying to squelch the coronavirus to learning to live with it.
“We’re proceeding as if things go really sour on us in the coming weeks and months,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. “We’re working for the worst-case scenario.”
At this point all the experts are now saying the same thing: that the Wuhan coronavirus will continue to spread worldwide. It cannot be contained, either within the city of Wuhan, the country of China, or the region of south-east Asia. The best that countries outside China can do at this point is to use case isolation and contact tracing to slow down the spread of the virus within their countries, and buy more time in order to prepare. As Dr. Amesh Adalja says above, “It is not a matter of if—it is a matter of when”.
As I have said before, what this means for you, reading this now, is that you need to prepare yourself and your family for the possibility that you will need to stay in your homes for a period of several weeks, avoiding contact with as many other people as possible, as a wave of illness caused by the Wuhan coronavirus sweeps through your community, forcing schools, businesses, and public transportation and public gathering places like movie theatres and shopping malls to close (as we already seen in Wuhan and many other cities in China). The time to prepare for this is NOW.
At least two weeks of food and other supplies (toilet paper, first aid supplies, soap and hand sanitizer, garbage bags, etc.).
Refills of all your presecription medications, plus a stock of over-the-counter medicines (talk to your doctor and pharmacist about creating an emergency supply of your prescription medication).
Power sources (flashlights, extra batteries, car chargers and adapters for your mobile devices, etc.).
Other things that you should do:
Sign up for any local alerts from your city, state/province, or federal government (or know where to find the information on the Internet). Find out what plans your employer is making.
If you haven’t yet, get your seasonal flu shot. It can’t hurt, and it will help to figure out whether or not you do have 2019-nCoV if/when you do become sick. Many areas now give out the flu shot for free.
Watch the following video from the World Health Organization on how wash your hands! (Yes, I know I have posted it before. Watch if anyways, you might learn something you didn’t know before. Proper hand hygiene will also help you avoid catching regular seasonal colds and influenza, so there’s a net benefit to society.)
Good Sources of Information on 2019-nCoV
Here is my list of good, credible, authoritative resources to learn more about the Wuhan coronoavirus (more formally known as 2019-nCoV):
Sources of Fast-Breaking News on 2019-nCoV (WARNING: News You Read Here May Not Be 100% Credible!)
PLEASE READ: In addition to the sources listed in the previous section, there are other places you can check, which might have reports (including translated links to local social media in China) that have not yet made the mainstream news media. Please keep in mind that the situation in China is chaotic, and that some of the information you find in the sources I list below might be gossip, rumours, hoaxes, conspiracy theories, misinformation, or disinformation!