But I don’t understand really why this flu is a “killer”. That is what I don’t get an answer to. Not really, anyway. Your discussion of disruptions is OK, but I still say things are much more advanced medically, technologically, sanitization, etc. I don’t understand either how this flu is so bad in itself, or how it can reach the levels of 1918 with all we have now.
This article explains some of it:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2253069/posts
It is a killer, but mostly in the third world.
...but I still say things are much more advanced medically, technologically, sanitization, etc.
Yes, and no. We have tremedous medical advancements, but the ability to use them is based on how many machines are available. For those with pulmonary complications, this means a mechanical respirator to get ventilation. The number of available respirators is not that great, and a widespread need for them would overwhelm the system.
(Hospitals pretty much have to show a profit, or at least break even, so there are not a lot of these devices just sitting in the back room waiting to be needed, nor the personnel to run them.)
So while we are significantly more advanced (than 1918), there is a limit to how many people can be treated at any given time. If that limit is exceeded people will die in greater numbers.
As for sanitation, before antibiotics, people recognized that infection was a killer. We have become more complacent, despite our greater knowledge, and are more likely than ever to take something which will mask symptoms and go out in public.
In addition, we rely on both antibiotics and technology to save lives, but if there were no hospital beds open, no available respirators, and demand even doubled or tripled for specific antibiotics (for opportunistic bacterial pneumonia--the major killer complication) or antivirals to try to head off the flu itself, the stocks of drugs would run out.
Keep in mind the pharmaceuticals have an expiration date, and that while no one wants to run out, no one wants to be left holding a lot of out-of-date inventory, either. So those stocks are based on projected need.
In limited outbreaks, the localized need can be covered, but in a truly widespread (pandemic) outbreak, there is no surplus to shift around.
We have not reached that point, and hopefully will not, but hope is not a viable plan of action.
So far, this flu has not reached that critical mass where the medical establishment here is overwhelmed. Although people in the US have died, they have been relatively few in number because even the most severe cases in the US still have access to the resources we have.
Two things could make this far worse.
One, that severe cases become so widespread that there is no slack in the system.
Two, that the current virus may recombine with other variants to produce a more lethal strain which is readily communicable. The more people infected, the more opportunities for such recombination exist.