General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow is the coronavirus outbreak going to end? Here's how similar epidemics played out.
By William Wan
March 2, 2020 at 11:24 a.m. EST
<snip>
The new coronavirus spreads so widely, it simply becomes a fact of life.
This is in essence what happened with the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, also called swine flu. It spread quickly, eventually to an estimated 11 to 21 percent of the global population. The WHO declared it a pandemic, and there was widespread fear.
H1N1 turned out to be much milder than initially feared, causing little more than runny noses and coughs in most people. And H1N1 is now so commonplace, its simply seen as a part of the seasonal flus that come and go every year among the global population.
Early estimates on the fatality rate for H1N1 were much higher than the roughly 0.01 to 0.03 percent it turned out to be. Still, the CDC estimates that H1N1 killed 12,469 people in the United States during that first-year period from 2009 to 2010, infected 60.8 million cases and caused 274,304 hospitalizations. The true number is hard to ascertain because many who die of flu-related causes arent tested to see whether it was H1N1 or another flu strain.
As context, the seasonal flu has killed at least 18,000 people in the United States so far this season, according to the CDC.
One reason H1N1 is a good parallel because while much less fatal than SARS or MERS, it was deadlier in because of how infectious and widespread it turned out to be. And not to be alarmist, but another good parallel might be the 1918 Spanish flu, which had a 2.5 percent fatality rate, eerily close to whats estimated for the coronavirus. CDC calls Spanish flu the deadliest pandemic flu virus in human history," because of how it infected roughly one third of the worlds population and killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide. Spanish flu, however, differed in that it was deadly to young and old, while coronavirus has proven to be most lethal to the elderly and left young people relatively unscathed.
</snip>
Kali
(55,011 posts)someone SERIOUSLY told me it would be gone as the weather warmed up.
localroger
(3,626 posts)Seasonal remission is a possibility; we don't know how this virus will respond to warmer temperatures. But the Spanish Flu did the same thing. It went away for the summer -- then came back the next winter and killed a lot more people.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)For perspective the Spanish flu was a strain of H1N1 as was the Swine flu in 2009.
Tree-Hugger
(3,370 posts).....we'll see cases drop rapidly as Spring swings into gear. Just like any other virus. However, I believe Trump will take credit for it.
The Wizard
(12,545 posts)meadowlander
(4,395 posts)in the Southern. Thats the thing with global pandemics. They dont just affect the US. Its always virus-friendly weather somewhere.
And the Southern hemisphere is looking at a double whammy where a corona virus outbreak overlaps with the regular flu season.
Tree-Hugger
(3,370 posts)He'll act like a hero when it does down in the USA.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)Do they just stay around or do some of them go dormant, extinct? Is the Spanish Flu still around in some form or another or did it just die out and go away?
localroger
(3,626 posts)Flu confers immunity to the strain you got, so if you survive it you won't get that strain again. If a flu kills too many people it loses opportunities to propagate both because its victims die too quickly and because aggressive mitigation measures are taken. COVID-19 is almost perfectly tuned to maximize destruction though; most people who get it won't know for a week or two if ever, during which they're spreading it around, whether they survive their infection or not. There is also reason to doubt that the infection confers future immunity; there are some patients thought to have gotten it twice. It is obviously out in the community at this point and for every reported case there are at least 2 or more incubating and spreading it around.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,619 posts)RAB910
(3,501 posts)is the better comparison. The mortality rate and transmission rate are the two numbers to focus on and they seem to be tracking a lot closer to the 1918 Pandemic (that killed 50 million or more) than it does H1N1
Thomas Hurt
(13,903 posts)40 or 50 dying is inconsequential. It is just the flu. The left wanting to prevent or contain what might be a virulent outbreak wanting to be cautious, so it is something and we should be taking steps to keep loss of life down.
I am not sure the right would give half a dead rat if 50 million people died.