Health, Fear & Anxiety: The ‘Virus-Apocalypse’ Is Not Here
Coronavirus, H1N1, Ebola, SARS - all serious viruses that many people in the world have experienced, but are viruses that only most of us read about over the last 10 to 15 years. These are all viruses that received a mass amount of coverage in the media… Some factual, some semi-factual, some not factual at all. One fact that has not been reported on nearly as much as those that have created mass anxiety, hysteria, stigma and distorted/irrational thinking is that Coronavirus (and the other previously mentioned viruses) is NOT the end of the world as we know it. While many of us can consume news about the recent Coronavirus outbreak in China in a rational and non-fearful way, many of us cannot. There are a number of us who become fixated by the coverage and begin to take precautions (E.g. buying masks, disinfecting, excessive hand washing, etc.), but there are also those who develop what is known as ‘Health Anxiety.’ While ‘Health Anxiety’ is not listed as an official diagnoses in mental health ‘Bible,’ the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders (DSM-5), what used to be known to the general public as ‘hypochondriasis’ or ‘hypochondria’ is now titled somatic symptom disorder and/or illness anxiety disorder. While Registered Psychotherapists, Social Workers and Counsellors are not permitted to diagnose in Ontario, the blanket term ‘health anxiety’ is often used and is, simply put, a condition in which certain people worry excessively about their health. For example, one can severely exaggerate the risk of having contracted, or soon contracting, a disease being heavily covered in the media like Coronavirus. Researchers and mental health professionals have known for some time that people judge risk based on a complex balance of emotion and deduction. More often than not, emotion wins the fight over deduction. Our instinctual reactions are very quick and automatic. Our immediate and instinctual reactions are beneficial in instances when the facts are not yet available… or there is not enough time to process the little that is known. Analytical reasoning is much slower and much more of a task for our brains. If we depended on analysis alone, decisions about risk would “paralyze us” (Carey, 2014, para. 13). In everyday life, the mind juggles the two methods of risk assessment. Research into this process, much of it completed by the Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman and his research partner Amos Tversky, shows that our instinctual reactions “can alter how people gauge the odds in making a wide variety of presumably rational decisions,” such as investing our income to preparing for natural disasters (Carey, 2014, para. 14). When it comes to something like the Coronavirus, let’s say for the purpose of this article, the chance of infection is one in 120 million. Most people would not be overly concerned about contracting the virus and instead view this estimation as being, basically, a near zero chance of happening to them. BUT if a co-worker happens to mention that they know a friend of a [...]