Looking at the comparison between COVID19 and the two common strains of Influenza w/r/t Viral Pneumonial infection, here is a description of 'regular' Flu (Influenza a/b) progressing to viral pneumonia:
>After inhalation, the virus is deposited onto the respiratory tract epithelium, where it attaches to ciliated columnar epithelial cells via its surface hemagglutinin. Local host defenses, such as mucociliary clearance, or secretion of specific secretory IgA antibodies can remove some of the virus particles. However, if mucociliary clearance is impaired (as in smokers [
21] or older patients [
22]) or secretory anti-influenza IgA antibodies are absent (as in no antecedent exposure to the virus), infection continues unabated.
So one reason COVID19 is ringing many, many alarm bells - we do not have any exposure, thus no IgA antibodies or equivalent. Thus pneumonial viral infection is much more likely. Of course, there is no reason why you can't get more than one viral (or bacterial) infection, and COVID19 will allow that to happen. And there is no tamiflu to fight this infection - a drug which has been used succesfully to the point where less than 1% of influenza a/b or h1n1 samples are resistant to it.
So the dangers we can say are present:
We lack the immune response that we have to Influenza a/b
This virus is spreading rapidly, at a pandemic level (which is normally associated with an increase in influenza cases progressing to viral pneumonia)
And unlike Influenza a/b Doctors have no antiviral treatment to treat these cases with.
There is temptation to speculate on the risk of harm that COVID19, like other more recent non-influenza a/b viruses, presents due to the nature of the actual infection... that's not something we can really know yet... it is definitely not at a SARS level, (personally would be suprised if despite the above factors, it wasn't inherenty a little more dangerous than the viral pneumonia caused by 'regular' influenza).
But that's beside the point. We fight Influenza a/b with herd immunities and specific immune responses that help prevent viral pneumonia infections. And when it happens, we fight that infection with an extremely efficient antiviral agent. So when you talk about the flu, or flu season, we are talking about THAT situation. And when you talk about COVID19, you are talking about another disease for which we don't have immunity or treatment. It resembles flu in terms of symptomology, and in some ways etiology... but in my opinion, the compulsion to call it 'a flu' is to willfully turn a blind eye the reasons why it will spread further, cause more problems, and why everyone from the WHO to the government cannot and willnot treat it as such. In a way, it's a philosophical argument, people like to group things that seem to belong together - which is understandable to a point... for many cases, the sufferer's experience will likely be very similair to catching Influenza B, with the caveat that they are more likely to experience discomfort or problems breathing because they will lack the particular immune response. But it's also an invitation to cognitive bias, and would certainly hinder the work of assessing, measuring, and treating.
