Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Post-Neolithic
If we use the 1918 figures, 975 million people would die. Keeping in mind that in 1918 we did not have millions of people flying every day, nor did we have products shipping across the globe in 24 hours.

We also didn't have modern medicine and antibiotics. Many of the deaths weren't from the flu itself, but from opportunistic secondary infections. If the same 1918 bug spread today, the death rate would be much lower.

22 posted on 03/12/2006 7:34:49 AM PST by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: NonZeroSum
"We also didn't have modern medicine and antibiotics. Many of the deaths weren't from the flu itself, but from opportunistic secondary infections.If the same 1918 bug spread today, the death rate would be much lower."

I agree with the first part, I just don't think modern medicine is going to be able to overcome modern progress. First, we will not even be able to make a vaccine until the virus mutates.

Which means the first group of people to catch the virus will either die or suffer the symptoms(assuming a vaccine is developed within 17 days), and live. The current Vaccine batch is made for the Vietnam 2004 not the A/Indonesia/2005 strain, which is what is spreading right now.Current statistics suggest that the virus takes 2-8 days to show in the infected person, sometimes up to 17 days.

That means the people infected with the virus will have spread it globally long before it's even noticed. Think airplanes and recirculated air. I have my doubts if it will mutate or not, but I have always believed in "Better safe then sorry".

26 posted on 03/12/2006 7:57:52 AM PST by Post-Neolithic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: NonZeroSum
We also didn't have modern medicine and antibiotics. Many of the deaths weren't from the flu itself, but from opportunistic secondary infections. If the same 1918 bug spread today, the death rate would be much lower.

The 360 million dead worst case I mentioned is based on the fact that with today's medical knowledge, there will be a lot few deaths than people think. This is mostly because our modern knowledge of nutrition has shown that people who eat a good diet and get a decent amount of Vitamins C and E plus antioxidants will have a better chance of surviving the effects of the flu.

27 posted on 03/12/2006 8:00:54 AM PST by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: NonZeroSum
The fundamental problem with any pandemic is not the disease per se, but that it quickly overwhelms the medical system, which simply does not have sufficient resources in place to deal with mass casualties. Just how many hospital beds do you think there are within a 50 mile radius of you? Or doctors/nurses to care for the sick? In a real pandemic there won't be enough and so no matter how "advanced" the medical system is, most folks will essentially be on their own. Ironically, people will have to learn to help each other to survive rather than expecting "the government" to do it for them. For a coddled society like ours this will be the biggest shock of all.

If you want to get a feel for the problems do read The Great Influenza by John Barry, which is a fascinating history of the 1918 pandemic and the rise of modern medicine.
34 posted on 03/12/2006 8:09:18 AM PST by AustinBill (consequence is what makes our choices real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: NonZeroSum

You took the words right out of my mouth. I'm also thinking sanitation factors.


36 posted on 03/12/2006 8:12:26 AM PST by twinzmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: NonZeroSum

From what I've read, the opportunistic infections were not the primary cause of death, rather the cykotine storm (over reaction of the immune system). It has been stated on FR by medical community people that there are only 115,000 ventilators in US hospitals and the hospital bed capacity is not large at all.

Modern medicine won't help people if the hospitals have no more beds and all machines that help people breathe are being used.

Antibiotics would only be of use if there is a secondary bacterial infection.


48 posted on 03/12/2006 9:18:36 AM PST by little jeremiah (Tolerating evil IS evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: NonZeroSum
We also didn't have modern medicine and antibiotics. Many of the deaths weren't from the flu itself, but from opportunistic secondary infections. If the same 1918 bug spread today, the death rate would be much lower.

I haven't finished reading the thread, I stopped at this remark of yours to make a comment: Most of the 1918 deaths were due to the 1918 virus, not opportunistic infections.

63 posted on 03/12/2006 11:26:49 AM PST by Judith Anne (Thank you St. Jude for favors granted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: NonZeroSum

"We also didn't have modern medicine and antibiotics."

Antiobiotics are anti-bacterials. Antiobiotics have no effect on viruses.

Once you are stricken with a virus, there is no medicinal treatment to kill the virus - your immune system is the only thing between you and death.


65 posted on 03/12/2006 11:34:50 AM PST by roaddog727 (P=3/8 A. or, P=plenty...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson