Slashdot Mirror
100 Years Ago, Influenza Killed 50 Million People. Could It Happen Again? (usatoday.com)
Last year 80,000 Americans died of the flu -- and 900,000 more were hospitalized, according to estimates by the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. NBC News reports:
The numbers were shocking. Until now, CDC has said flu kills anywhere between 12,000 and 56,000 people a year, depending on how bad the flu season is, and that it puts between 250,000 and 700,000 into the hospital with serious illness. The numbers for the 2017-2018 flu season go far beyond that... Usually, flu hits first in one region and then another, but this past season saw widespread flu activity all at once, for weeks on end.
Coincidentally, it's the 100-year anniversary of the great flu pandemic of 1918, according to an article shared by schwit1: Up to 500 million people -- about one-third of the world's population -- became infected with the influenza virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. As many as 50 million died, or one out of every 30 human beings on the planet, killing more American troops than those that died on World War I battlefields. The intensity and speed with which it struck were almost unimaginable, the worst global pandemic in modern history.
The article asks the ultimate question: Could it happen again? Top health and science groups, such as the World Health Organization, the National Academy of Sciences and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, predict influenza pandemics are nearly certain to recur. "Influenza viruses, with the vast silent reservoir in aquatic birds, are impossible to eradicate," the World Health Organization warned. "With the growth of global travel, a pandemic can spread rapidly globally with little time to prepare a public health response." A pandemic could also arise if a strain mutates with or develops directly from animal flu viruses, the CDC said...
In a near worst-case scenario, a new, lethal and highly infectious flu virus would break out in a crowded, unprepared megacity that lacks public health infrastructure, according to Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Heath. Such a fast-moving virus could burst from a city and catch a ride with international travelers before public health officials realize what is happening.
The article points out that today there's now safeguards to detect and counteract influenza outbreaks that didn't exist in 1918 (including outbreak-detecting systems, as well as better antiviral drugs and the ability to develop vaccines more rapidly). But it also reminds us that the 1918 flu pandemic killed more people in two years than the plague did in an entire century.
The CDC recommends that every year, anyone six months of age or older should get a flu vaccine. But I'd be curious to hear from Slashdot's readers. Have you gotten your 2018 flu shot?
Coincidentally, it's the 100-year anniversary of the great flu pandemic of 1918, according to an article shared by schwit1: Up to 500 million people -- about one-third of the world's population -- became infected with the influenza virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. As many as 50 million died, or one out of every 30 human beings on the planet, killing more American troops than those that died on World War I battlefields. The intensity and speed with which it struck were almost unimaginable, the worst global pandemic in modern history.
The article asks the ultimate question: Could it happen again? Top health and science groups, such as the World Health Organization, the National Academy of Sciences and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, predict influenza pandemics are nearly certain to recur. "Influenza viruses, with the vast silent reservoir in aquatic birds, are impossible to eradicate," the World Health Organization warned. "With the growth of global travel, a pandemic can spread rapidly globally with little time to prepare a public health response." A pandemic could also arise if a strain mutates with or develops directly from animal flu viruses, the CDC said...
In a near worst-case scenario, a new, lethal and highly infectious flu virus would break out in a crowded, unprepared megacity that lacks public health infrastructure, according to Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Heath. Such a fast-moving virus could burst from a city and catch a ride with international travelers before public health officials realize what is happening.
The article points out that today there's now safeguards to detect and counteract influenza outbreaks that didn't exist in 1918 (including outbreak-detecting systems, as well as better antiviral drugs and the ability to develop vaccines more rapidly). But it also reminds us that the 1918 flu pandemic killed more people in two years than the plague did in an entire century.
The CDC recommends that every year, anyone six months of age or older should get a flu vaccine. But I'd be curious to hear from Slashdot's readers. Have you gotten your 2018 flu shot?
Supportive health care has gotten MASSIVELY better since 1918, astronomically so. A similarly virulent strain would be bad, but nothing like as bad as it was, because a lot of people back then died due to lack of even basic supportive care.
Of course, no one said it had to be the same level of virulence, it could be much worse, so ignoring the possibility doesn't make sense.
The main problem with flu shots is that they target a particular variety of influenza. Too often, that is the wrong variety for the pending influenza season.
Last season (2017-2018), my wife and I got our flu shots early in the fall. In the week just before New Year 2018, we both thought we were coming down with colds. The day after New Year, we felt sick enough to see our family doctor, who swabbed high in our noses. After dinner, he called us to tell us we tested positive for influenza.
Later that same night (still 2 January), my wife could not stop coughing. Since she had a heart problem (now fixed), I suggested that I should take her to the local hospital's emergency room. She did not want to go, but I insisted. She was hospitalized for a week with pneumonia although we were both current with both kinds of pneumonia shots. (According to our doctor, the two types of shots only protect against about 60% of the types of pneumonia.)
Each year, we still get our flu shots in the hope that, this time, the shots are targeting the variety of influenza that will be going around. My wife got her flu shot in August, and I got mine the beginning of this month (September).
An attempt to develop a universal flu shot is underway. The goal is not to target any one variety of influenza but instead to protect against all varieties.
I have read many times that the flu shots will result in reduced symptoms, even if it doesn't prevent it entirely.
Flu shots will reduce the number of people who die from the flu.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Supportive health care has gotten MASSIVELY better since 1918, astronomically so. A similarly virulent strain would be bad, but nothing like as bad as it was, because a lot of people back then died due to lack of even basic supportive care.
Of course, no one said it had to be the same level of virulence, it could be much worse, so ignoring the possibility doesn't make sense.
Yes, and not to mention the fact that, back 1918, there was extreme wealth inequality and the majority of people were poor and malnourished. It wasn't until after WWII that governments started to take public health and nutrition seriously because they realised that far too many military-age men we too unfit to fight for them in wars.
Public nutrition and health have got much better since 1918 but it is starting to look like it's starting to slip back with obesity, heart disease, child poverty, etc., making a lot of people very unhealthy and vulnerable to disease. Oh, there's a lot more elderly and infirm people around these days who are particularly vulnerable to the flu.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
There are a number of people who will contract the flu virus but never show any symptoms. These people will still spread the flu to their loved ones, co-workers, people on the train, etc.
This is why, "But I never get the flu," is not a good excuse for not getting the flu shot. Even though the flu shot does not work 100%, it still saves lives, and the more people who get the shot, the more lives that are saved. If people who "never get the flu" get the flu shot, more lives will be saved.
If you have any kind of insurance, the shot is free. If you don't have any insurance, the shot is free. Look around. I think CVS or Walgreens has a deal where you pay some small amount, say $5 for a flu shot and they give you $10 in coupons or something, but there are free shots for almost everyone.
You are welcome on my lawn.
when faced with a large outbreak. Aside from flu shots there's quarantine procedures, extra steps to be taken at hospitals and clinics, keeping water clean, etc, etc.
If you have a large outbreak and it's the kind of flu that knocks people straight on their asses instead of just giving them some sniffles and aches and pains, there aren't enough medical care facilities to handle ~10% of the population suddenly needing medical care to potentially prevent their deaths. Even if you get a flu that has a 10% mortality rate, with 10% of the population catching it, that's around 3.5 million deaths in the U.S. That's well over the annual number of deaths and having that many in a short window would create large issue in itself.
That's another problem the world has (America especially). This idea that we can't do anything about these things.
There are things that can be done (I would say you're probably going to have the best results by taking personal precautions than anything the government tries to do), but it's not as easy as saying that we've got a really good plan and expecting the universe to go along with it. As the saying goes, no plan survives first contact with the enemy. Outside of having something akin to antibiotics that would be easily distributable and effective at treating the illness, most of what you might try to propose is just not going to be feasible or nearly as effective as you'd like. If you could have these big plans at a national level that actually worked anywhere near as well as we would like, the Soviets would have won the cold war.