One hundred years since flu epidemic

Hypothetically as we approach the 100th anniversary of the worldwide flu epidemic let's look at the numbers.

Roughly 28% of the American population got sick (vs. roughly 32% of worldwide population)
Mortality in America was about 2% of those who got sick (vs. as high as 20% in some countries, and a worldwide average of 5% to 10%).
Almost certainly more people died in America than would die in World War Two over two decades later.
Length of the pandemic 30 months
Effect on pregnant women staggeringly high (estimates up to 70% in some countries)
Origin unknown but probably Kansas (the name Spanish flu was a fluke since Spain did not have wartime censorship it had the most accurate news stories)
Mass media consisted solely of telegrams and newspapers as radio was just being experimented with.


It's arguable whether the modern world with massive transit and better medicine would be better or worse off than in 1918.

Assuming the same percentages for America today then roughly 100 million people get sick and 2 million die in 30 month period. Assume a peak of 4K-5K per day at some point. Worldwide assume the low of 5% mortality (or 325-350 million dead in 30 months). If birth rates remain at normal there would be 325-250 million born in that period.

I am assuming that American society in 1918 righted itself within a few years. Life was difficult and a lot of people died. Most people didn't travel more than 200 miles from home. There was no mass media to replay the statistics and visuals over and over. Within a dozen years the problems of the depression would completely overshadow the memory of the flu epidemic.

But society today is very different than pre-radio America. What would it be like 6 months after the epidemic? Would people be trying to work from home on their computers? Would the travel and entertainment business be on their last legs? Would gambling exist? Would their be a whole class of people who charge everything since they are afraid to touch currency? Would our cities be rioting (as far as I know there was no rioting in 1920 as pandemic ended)? Given that unknown fears (assume origin of flu not established) would their be a backlash on immigration? Would there be a return to children and families as people look back on the disaster?

One difference in the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic was that it targeted the mainstream workforce rather than the very young and the elderly. Out of 525 million people infected worldwide, 40 million died. Our troops came home from WWI and killed 675,000 in America between 1918-19, 200,000 of those in the single month of October 1918. We now have 20,000 US citizens dying from flu annually. So, if a similar epidemic hit today and killed off a proportionate percentage of the strong 20-55 year olds who manage the infrastructure of our world, that would be interesting. Those who handle finance, food and fuel transportation, communications, manufacturing, military, etc would be down leaving the survivors to learn to take up the slack.

there would certainly be suspicions that terrorists caused it today

Quote: zippyboy

One difference in the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic was that it targeted the mainstream workforce rather than the very young and the elderly. Out of 525 million people infected worldwide, 40 million died. Our troops came home from WWI and killed 675,000 in America between 1918-19, 200,000 of those in the single month of October 1918. We now have 20,000 US citizens dying from flu annually. So, if a similar epidemic hit today and killed off a proportionate percentage of the strong 20-55 year olds who manage the infrastructure of our world, that would be interesting. Those who handle finance, food and fuel transportation, communications, manufacturing, military, etc would be down leaving the survivors to learn to take up the slack.

You make a number of good points. Although the 40 million estimate worldwide seems a little on the low side. I have heard estimates as high as 100 million.

Also our troops may have taken the flu to Europe rather than the other way around. It was first reported in Kansas and may have originated there. It is highly speculative as to the origin of the pandemic.

I also didn't realize that 200,000 died in a single month (that's about about 30% of the total flu deaths in a single month). The normal death rate at that time was probably about 140,000 per month (from all causes). It certainly overshadows the 120,000 we lost in all of World War I.

One could argue that was the worst month in American history although the increasing age and size of our population means that roughly 220,000 Americans die every month today.


The scale of death is sobering. A total of 200K in one month is 6.67K per day (roughly twice as many as in 9-11). And the death rate of 2% in America was far below the death rate in Europe and the rest of the world. In addition all of Europe was just recovering from the massive death toll of the world war.

Even Canada took it worse than America with a slightly higher death toll because of the flu. The death toll because of WWI was already 5 to 6 times that of the USA.

And comparably North America got off relatively lightly. Samoa was possibly the hardest hit place, and they lost 20% of their population in two months.

Pathogens tend to run their course in a population. The primary factor is host nutritional state as pathogens mutate into more virulent forms if a host is susceptible.

Towns in America that tried to isolate themselves found that impossible to do. It would be even more difficult in this day and age even though in 1917 the mails brought the virus and in this day and age emails bring only a different type of virus. Towns that fed their sick and fed them well did fine during the pandemic. Nutritional status, which is mainly indicated by wealth, will continue to be the primary factor during the pandemic.

>the mails brought the virus

maybe the world is safer now that the mail volume is less and less and less, you think?

Better or worse off? Different for different things.

Better: Medicine has improved and the abiltiy to fight such epidemics. Did we even have the CDC then? What did we have? In addition to medicine, sanitation is better today. I think on Pawn Stars they said the flu epidemic led to banning of spittoons in public places? Communication is better but I don't give much importance there. With email hoaxes so widespread that could make it worse as people do the wrong things after getting the wrong message. Remember how a few idiots suffocated after sealing their houses with plastic and duct tape after 9-11?

Worse: Populations are more concentrated these days, though the average per household is lower. Smaller family sizes also mean the sick have fewer people to care for them. Even with WWI vets, international travel was very rare in 1918, today it is rare to find someone not touched by someone traveling outside North America at least monthly. You might as well forget quarentining a block or even a house these days. And lastly, maybe most important, there is the fatigue of epidemics factor. Since the early 1980s everything is an "epidemic." Herpes, AIDS, SARS, Bird Flu, even for "obesity" they use "epidemic." Plenty of folks are like myself and tired of hearing the Chicken Littles warning us about another one.

I'm reasonably convinced that H1NC was at least lessened by the warnings and hype... hard to tell, but a higher than normal number of people taking the flu shot probably worked (certainly it never reached the levels people expected it to, and some will say that it was all hype, and others that there was an appropriate response to which mitigated the problem before it came around).

Quote: AZDuffman

Worse: Populations are more concentrated these days, though the average per household is lower. Smaller family sizes also mean the sick have fewer people to care for them. Even with WWI vets, international travel was very rare in 1918, today it is rare to find someone not touched by someone traveling outside North America at least monthly.

In 1918 half the cars in the USA were Model T's. They could go top speed of 40-45 mph and had a range of 130-210 miles per tank. When the tank was low you had to back up a steep hill. Only 15 years earlier the first cross country trip by motor car was made (it took 63 days). By 1918 you could do it in 3 weeks. Newspapers tried not to excite the population. A news article written on the eve of one of the worst months in our history seems almost impossibly mild.

Quote: News Article 23 September 1918

INFLUENZA IS UNDER CONTROL AT GREAT LAKES
Death Rate Lower Than in East, Says Capt. Moffet of Naval Station

CHICAGO- There are 4,500 cases of Spanish Influenza at the Great Lakes naval training station, and there have been more than a hundred deaths since Sept 9, according to a statement issued by Capt. William A Moffet, commandant, to allway the fears of relatives of men in training and to act at rest sensational rumors if the ravages if the malady.

Caot. Moffet declared the situation well in hand there being now only about 1,000 cases sufficiently serious to warrant their transfer to the base hospital.

Liberty of the men had been restricted, he explained, only as a precautionary measure to protect the surrounding civilian population. THe number of cases is decreasing at the rate of 10 per cent a day, Capt. Moffet said.

I think good preventive measures, unfortunately also lessen the desire to keep them up if it feels like nothing has happened.

Who hasn't had something stolen, and suddenly you're less careless and more hawk-like about your stuff? Excluding long term actions that don't require eternal vigilance (like adding steel bars to your windows), the longer you go without an incident the more likely you're going to let your guard down some.

We will never have to wonder what would happen to modern society if the Spanish Flu struck again. Why? It has already happened. Spanish Flu was the first of two pandemics involving the H1N1 strain of influenza. The second occurred in 2009 known as the Swine Flu. The swine flu had fewer than 15K confirmed deaths which is a far cry from the first pandemic. It's obvious the better medicine, better precautions, better knowledge/hygiene played a role in keeping the death toll significantly lower.

I looked into it while I was watching season 2 of "The Event". Knowing that Spanish Flu and Swine Flu were the same strain kinda ruined the plot for me.

Hemingway was 19 in 1918 and saw 2 of his friends die from it. From then on Hemingway was terrified of getting the flu for the rest of his life, as were many people of that generation.

Quote: MarieBicurie

We will never have to wonder what would happen to modern society if the Spanish Flu struck again. Why? It has already happened. Spanish Flu was the first of two pandemics involving the H1N1 strain of influenza. The second occurred in 2009 known as the Swine Flu. The swine flu had fewer than 15K confirmed deaths which is a far cry from the first pandemic. It's obvious the better medicine, better precautions, better knowledge/hygiene played a role in keeping the death toll significantly lower.

I looked into it while I was watching season 2 of "The Event". Knowing that Spanish Flu and Swine Flu were the same strain kinda ruined the plot for me.

Still waiting for that answer. You thought maybe if a few months go by, it'll be forgotten? Just ask Keyser if I let unanswered questions slip past me.



Ken