But evolution can only seek local improvements in survivability. So one way you can keep mortality high is by stretching out the infectious period. So a virus that takes a long time to kill you doesn't have the same environmental pressure to become less serious.

That is the conundrum for any parasitic body. I have recently been rescuing a venerable old sycamore from ivy which had grown thick and fat and which threatened to overwhelm it. Perhaps it is part of nature's intention, that something should destroy the long lived, but if ivy grows to dominate its host, the host tree gets weaker and sicker until it dies, it then starts to rot and eventually collapses, taking any remaining ivy with it.

So I cut through all the thick ivy stems and now the ivy itself is dying from the bottom up and the tree should survive and prosper.

For a virus to spread and replicate, it needs its hosts to survive long enough to pass on the infection. If the disease is asymptomatically contagious as this coronavirus apparently is, so much the better from the point of view of the virus - nature is all about competition for existence between different organisms.

I'm talking global and not just our own health system. The question isn't a moral one but more a practical one, at won't stage will global governments and agencies stop pouring money into containing the spread.

The purpose is to multiply and spread to ensure survival, but once its spread what happens to the host is irrelevant to the virus.

The mortality is to do with the hosts, and in most cases its the weak that succumb.

Patient confidentiality laws prevent us knowing more about those who were infected.

It is ridiculous. We need to repeal them during this emergency.

Russia has confirmed that 2 people now have the virus

The governments lack of transparency is going to cause issues. Going into a weekend I expect the NHS will creak under the pressure of people under stably panicking.

We need to know where these people came from.

Where are they are located

What immediate action is being taken to understand who they have been in contact with.

On Wikipedia most other countries confirm the location.

We need to also now to put together plans on how we close out borders at short notice.

Why would a virus want to kill it's host?  What it wants (from an evolutionary perspective) is high virility and zero mortality.   Then it can go on forever.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The purpose is to multiply and spread to ensure survival, but once its spread what happens to the host is irrelevant to the virus.

The mortality is to do with the hosts, and in most cases it's the weak that succumb.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet, a virus is really just some very complex chemical substance, consisting of a nucleic acid molecule in a protein coat. Poliovirus has an empirical formula of C332652 H492388 N98245 O131196 P7501 S2340, compared to Polyethylene being (C2H4)n, Sucrose being C12 H22 O11, ethanol being C2 H6 O, and water H2 O.!

The virus action - to invade the cells of a host & make multiple copies of it's cells, causing illnesses or death, is really just a chemical reaction. A chemical reaction, of course, involves electron transfer - oxidation, reduction, electrophillic & nucleophillic addition & substitution, etc, etc. The various elements trying to attain the most stable oxidation states, e.g. Carbon being +4 state, Hydrogen +1, Phosphorus +5, Sulfur, +4 or +6, but Nitrogen 0, as it wants to be an element that has very strong triple bonds!

The nearest, much more basic chemical reaction, would be polymerisation, where monomers combine to form great chain or complex polymers, sometimes with elimination of simple molecules. 

Maybe a an alternative way of fighting viruses is to introduce something in which a virus has a greater affinity for, something to donate/share electrons to much more readily than be just invading cells and to make copies itself.

OK assuming it is the york case (we still don't know for sure because stupid laws) there is some good news. According to local press:

Apparantely there were three people travelling at the hotel and therefore only two out of the three have tested positive. This is despite one of the three being symptomatic.

Which means, only 1/2 close companions caught the virus in the incubation period. It backs up my speculation that you have to be in relatively close contact to get the virus during the asymptomatic period.

BBC reports that they had been staying at a hotel in Yorkshire, so I'd say it's fairly likely it's that case. I was in the Phoenix Inn (a stone's throw away from the hotel) last weekend...

I also met up with some friends on the 24th, we literally walked past that hotel.

My precautions are starting to feel like less of a joke.

Just heard an expert witness on World-at-One. Her was saying it is all about proximity. Supposing someone with the virus had been on a coach journey - the experts would only be concerned about anybody sitting next to the patient on the coach - that is what he said. However, I would also want to see those sitting in the adjacent rows checked too.

In general I observe the '3 feet rule'

Unles ssomeone coughs or sneezes my understanding is that it's unlikely to remote to catch something from anyone further than that distance.

If they are coughing or sneezing, double it at least.

Also increase if environment isn't well ventilated.

Apparently the infected have been taken to Newcastle. Isn't that where Quantum is holed up? The Bigg Market is going to be fun tonight. Going near to the copious quantities of flesh on offer will be fraught with even more danger than usual. 

Goes without saying I think all brexit celebrations should be cancelled.

This is the good diagram illustrating my point that most viruses are either very deadly or very infectious but rarely both.

We can see that nCov is on the x=y line which is very scary. In theory there is nothing to stop it mutating into something more deadly while it remains as infectious.

I carry an alcohol based disinfectant to use while I'm out. And I always wash before I leave or when I return with soap and water.

High temperatures also reduce risk of picking it up from surfaces.

Also stopped eating raw food. Toast instead of Bread e.c.t.

Just been to the Bishops Stortford Marks and Spencer Foodhall and spotted a white British lady probably about 70 with a surgical mask on. The first one I've noticed in this town the first of many perhaps?

One thing to bear in mind is that your skin surface temperature is 33C

And your hands may even be warmer than that. So your skin itself is a disinfectant, as long as you don't touch your face in theory it should inactivate over an hour or so just by being on your skin.

I'm asymptomatic at 7 days so know my relatively close encounter likely didn't come to anything. But have since completely cancelled anything that requires me to go into crowded areas.

Trouble is, it means you also can't touch your phone, your wallet etc as they then become proxies. 

Keep my phone right next to the radiator. Temp gets to 40C there.