Past pandemic comparisons

This is directly from the CDC site regarding the 1968 flu Pandemic:

"The 1968 pandemic was caused by an influenza A (H3N2) virus comprised of two genes from an avian influenza A virus, including a new H3 hemagglutinin, but also contained the N2 neuraminidase from the 1957 H2N2 virus. It was first noted in the United States in September 1968. The estimated number of deaths was 1 million worldwide and about 100,000 in the United States. Most excess deaths were in people 65 years and older. The H3N2 virus continues to circulate worldwide as a seasonal influenza A virus."

This is directly from the CDC site regarding the 1957 flu Pandemic:

"In February 1957, a new influenza A (H2N2) virus emerged in East Asia, triggering a pandemic (“Asian Flu”). This H2N2 virus was comprised of three different genes from an H2N2 virus that originated from an avian influenza A virus, including the H2 hemagglutinin and the N2 neuraminidase genes. It was first reported in Singapore in February 1957, Hong Kong in April 1957, and in coastal cities in the United States in summer 1957. The estimated number of deaths was 1.1 million worldwide and 116,000 in the United States."

As you can see, the numbers in those pandemics DWARF the COVID numbers. Of particular interest to me is the statement from the 1968 excerpt that says, "The H3N2 virus continues to circulate worldwide as a seasonal influenza A virus." So that virus developed into something that we routinely see now that no one is afraid of. One point I'd like to make is that that's what viruses do when they go through the population: the population develops herd immunity, and the virus loses virulence.

I think one reason COVID is such a problem compared to these past pandemics is because in the past, that long ago, hospitals worldwide were not so congested. You could see a doctor or go to a hospital pretty quickly, yet even before COVID, hospitals in all countries have been over capacity for years.

Another reason is that COVID seems to transmit more easily and is traveling through the population faster. But personally, I do not see how lockdown is going to help anything. If Covid were allowed to travel through the population, a basic herd immunity would be achieved, and when it mutates, it would be a lot less virulent - because the past has shown that that ALWAYS happens. H1N1 was almost nothing and it was a cousin of the Spanish Flu.

If they were to keep us in lockdown and successfully prevent the bulk of the population from getting Covid, and then release and mandate a vaccine for it, the result would be: IF the vaccine works, it would protect large numbers of people temporarily and would need to be given every year just like the flu one is, due to mutation. But this would also ensure herd immunity would never be achieved simply because vaccines to NOT induce permanent immunity. There would always be pockets of outbreaks and ANYONE would be susceptible to them, and with no previous exposure, the virulence would not go down.

If lockdown would WORK, that would be great and 2-3 months would not be THAT bad. But the problem as I see it, is that it is NOT working, WILL NOT work, and Covid will still be out there.

Compared to the past two pandemics detailed here, I think the response to Covid is unwarranted, dangerous to our future health and dangerous to the economy and mental health of everyone.

a reply to: thebtheb

Just imagine that flu today.
People in the late 50s didn't get out like they do today. They were at home much more and definitely didn't drive as far to spread the disease.

And what if it had spread uncontrolled, with no response from society, and what if it had actually been extremely virulent, and what if it had killed 1M+. That possibility wasn't worthy of a response eh?

Wow.



a reply to: thebtheb

Well Covid aint over yet, so don't count your chickens. There is and can never be any correlation to past pandemics because back then there wasn't as many people in the world in such concentrated numbers and there wasn't the travel infrastructure of moving vast numbers of people about the planet.
Now i would assume by your post that you go for the herd immunity scenario that you are youngish and not in the danger bracket. Well I'm in the bracket and you want to condemn me to death so you can have an easier life. I cannot put what I really want to as ATS would ban me completely. So fornicate off.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Well Covid aint over yet, so don't count your chickens. There is and can never be any correlation to past pandemics because back then there wasn't as many people in the world in such concentrated numbers and there wasn't the travel infrastructure of moving vast numbers of people about the planet.
Now i would assume by your post that you go for the herd immunity scenario that you are youngish and not in the danger bracket. Well I'm in the bracket and you want to condemn me to death so you can have an easier life. I cannot put what I really want to as ATS would ban me completely. So fornicate off.

Oh please. It's my opinion. I'm 54. Feel free to disagree but don't assume I "condemn people" in any way. I presented an opinion, backed up with facts. My concern is the ultimate end goal here. And my ultimate end goal is that this goes away, and ceases to be a danger to people in the future. My concern is that the way it's being treated right now might prevent that from happening. If you want to turn all that into some kind of offense to you, go ahead.

To me and the other millions of people in the danger zone. You don't seem to understand your opinion is the thin end of the wedge. Allow that to happen and what is the next step. And don't say you didn't mean that because that is how these things get started.

a reply to: thebtheb

Another reason is that COVID seems to transmit more easily and is traveling through the population faster. But personally, I do not see how lockdown is going to help anything.

There are more people in the world today and global travel is far easier these days plus medical practices and treatments have improved , the lockdown is designed to put as much distance between the virus and its next potential victim as possible , comparing this with others doesn't give a clear picture.

Ummm..
Back in the 40s and 50s from around memorial day to labor day, polio would run through the developed world.

For the average year, 16,000 people would be paralyzed by it, while it would kill around 2,000. Mostly kids.

So far, covid has killed 11,000 people.. at least and there has been at least 378,298 cases in the us. in what?? A couple of months??

Polio had been around forever, they knew what to expect. Thay had a large inventory of iron lungs accumulated by the time a vaccine came around..

This virus is new, we are still just beginning to learn about it. It hasn't been around long enough to know what the long term effects are. But it has killed far more people than polio did during its typical outbreak.

Thank god they didnt let polio run rampant like some seem to want to let this do... my older brothers and sister along with many others in their age group would have ended up crippled or dead.

Make the comparison when this is over with.

a reply to: crayzeed

Right. New York officials at all levels of government are predicting that what is happening there, will happen in other parts of the country.

I don't know if that's a genuine warning from them, or is it more of a hope, so they don't look so incompetent.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Now i would assume by your post that you go for the herd immunity scenario that you are youngish and not in the danger bracket. Well I'm in the bracket and you want to condemn me to death so you can have an easier life. I cannot put what I really want to as ATS would ban me completely. So fornicate off.

So, are you essentially saying that you're willing to give up essential liberty - not just yours, but mine, and everyone else's in our entire country - just because you're scared that your past life choices (resulting in your being in poor health and having a weakened immune system) may have put your life at risk to this virus?

Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Past life choices??
Like growing old... how dare we not avoid the unavoidable...
Like being born with cystic fibrosis or other genetic diseases, or born prematurely, or with asthma.
Like being born in the wrong place and having the surrounding industry's pollution increase the danged cancer rate??

Or... like choosing to go to work, do your shopping for you, stock the store selves, make your big mac's??
That is probably the poorest life choice people are having to make at the moment!!
Maybe you shouldnt bring up those poor life choices people make that increases their risk... in case someone you are depending on to do their job happens to have a lightbulb go off in their head and decide that the poorest life choice they are making just isnt worth the paycheck it is providing them.

Just what essential liberty are you being forced to give up anyway?? I'm curious..

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: tanstaafl

Past life choices??
Like growing old...

Age is not the predominant factor. It is underlying health conditions... poor health... poor immune system.

how dare we not avoid the unavoidable...
Like being born with cystic fibrosis or other genetic diseases, or born prematurely, or with asthma.

Yes, some people are born with a defective immune system. Those are in the extreme minority.

Tragic, but a reality of life. There are, in fact, many many things people with these conditions can do to eliminate most if not all of their symptoms. Research 'epigenetics'...

And to answer your unasked question... no, I do not believe that we should shut down the country to protect a tiny minority of our population. It makes far more sense to protect them, instead. Quarantine them, not everyone else.

Just what essential liberty are you being forced to give up anyway?? I'm curious.

Really? People are losing their businesses, their livelihoods, and their minds from being forced by a bunch of pansies to 'shelter in place'.

This is the first time in history that healthy people are being placed in involuntary quarantine, and it is not only stupid, it is blatantly unconstitutional

a reply to: tanstaafl
You still don't get it. It's not about your freedom, or freedom of movement. You can go around much as you want,bbuuuuttt, it aint just about you. You may survive it but how many will you infect in your freedom walkabout.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: tanstaafl
You still don't get it. It's not about your freedom, or freedom of movement.

You are the one who doesn't get it.

It is all about freedom - my freedom, your freedom, everyone's freedom - and not just freedom of movement.

You can go around much as you want,bbuuuuttt, it aint just about you. You may survive it but how many will you infect in your freedom walkabout.

Ummm... none? You do know, I would have to be infected to actually infect someone else?

Did you miss what I said?

This is the first time in history that the uninfected have been the ones placed in quarantine.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: crayzeed

Right. New York officials at all levels of government are predicting that what is happening there, will happen in other parts of the country.

I don't know if that's a genuine warning from them, or is it more of a hope, so they don't look so incompetent.

Wrong, NYC is one of a kind. 8 million+ people packed in to 300 mile area. know where else in the USA is even close to that, Not to mention the Covid-19 hit on NYC seems almost manufactured now that is My ATS brain talking but still something is a miss in NYC.

a reply to: tanstaafl
And that's the problem. You don't know when or if you are infected. Two weeks you can be active with you feeling no effect.

originally posted by: LordAhriman
Make the comparison when this is over with.

When its over with ?

The question is would we have even known there was something going on were it not for the Media in the first place, And I seriously mean that Imagine there was a Media Black out on Covid-19 from the beginning would we have even noticed this Covid-19 Virus Aside from the occasional doctor saying well there is a bad virus going around .

100,000 deaths world wide from this virus , 150,000 people die every day. Not even a blip on the radar.

a reply to: tanstaafl


We usually quarentine those that are possibly sick with the virus... which means testing and tracking down the contacts..
Not those that are more susceptible to the disease while we let the infected run rampant.

And. Around here, I dont see where anyone is in quarentine unless they have been tested and found positive and even then unless they are near deaths door practically, they are being sent home and well.. I dont really think the quarentines are being really enforced that well. I live on a major highway, and there seems to be just about as many cars out on it.
Most of the restaurants have adapted to using a pick up service. Sure some businesses are taking a hit, but that is what those sba loans are supposed to be for.. although it sounds like trump and friends may have found a way to tap into that money and misdirect it.
Grocery stores are left untouched be the social distancing measures, so arent pizza shops.. they all have help wanted signs on them.... kind of makes one wonder, would the businesses be in trouble anyway because the employees dont want to risk working?
My one son still hasn't gone back to work, even though he is in the essential services category. He is one of those that you would quarentine, because of the life choices he must of made while he was a baby I guess. So far, hes had savings to tide him over. And between me and his brothers, we will make sure he is okay because that is what some families do.
But. I suppose the next step in your grand plan would be to force them to work if need be?

Meanwhile, trump recently announced that the federal govt was going to stop funding the testing sites. He then quickly backtracked. Theres medical professionals that have been unable to be tested, and, around here I think you still cant be tested unless you are sick enough to be hospitalized and getting the test would affect how they would treat you. So, we have a bunch of people running around, all potentially carrying the virus, many having the symptoms, but not many being tested. And, the only advice being given outside of the shelter in place, social distancing, is if you are sick, stay home...
I dont think things would be much better for the businesses if there wasnt stay at home orders. Grocers are being slammed with pick up, delivery orders.. no one really wants to go out and shop for their groceries if they can help it.. or alot dont.
They ain't gonna want to visit the hairdresser, or go shopping for crap they dont need anyways.
The next song and dance from you guys would be how it's our patriotic duty to get out there and spend our money probably.. and we'd still be pansies for not doing so.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

That would be 100,000 deaths on top of the 150000 though.
Ya, I think someone might notice, especially if refrigerated truck started filling up with dead bodies at their local hospital.
Maybe they wouldnt know what to call it, what its name was, but they would know the it was something.