Friday, May 8, 2020

1919 vs 2020?

Well worth reading discussion of the similarities and differences between the current pandemic and the previous one here.
"It’s really remarkable to me that the flu of a century killed 675,000 Americans out of a population of 110 million, meaning that roughly works out to the 2.2 million upper range guess of projections for COVID-19 by proportion of the population. And yet, the cultural response to it was primarily to shrug our collective shoulders and get on with our lives. It wasn’t total ignorance that created that situation. Some communities did engage in effective quarantining, for instance, and there were real death rate differentials between them. But to my knowledge anyway, sports weren’t cancelled. The World Series went on as normal (and quite famously in 1919!). There was no effective government response at the federal level."
One point I will take issue with, however, is this:
"Basically, what has changed is us. We see ourselves as something closer to immortal today." (emphasis mine) "The only two health crises even close to the flu between then and now were polio and HIV and those are very different types of events. Polio’s transformation into something much more powerful than in the past definitely scared lots and lots and lots of people, but what could you really do? AIDS certainly frightened many, but it was also classified as gay cancer early on and Reagan was happy to let them all die until his buddy Rock Hudson fell to the disease.

We have a culture of immortality. That’s not a bad thing. Science has advanced so far. We think we can protect ourselves from the outside world through eating and exercise and medicine. To an extent, we can. Even though COVID-19 has hit very old people in nursing homes and those with co-morbidities much harder than most people, it’s seen as an unimaginable tragedy to lose these people in a way that the deaths of thousands upon thousands of young parents and workers was not a century ago. To an extent, this is a reminder that human beings are incredibly fragile animals who have bodies where germs and bacteria pass in and out of all the time. We just don’t think about it. Our seeming indifference to climate change is related to this as well. We simply think we will figure it out, just like we figured out polio or the ozone layer or how to make a good television comedy."
I think this confuses correlation with causation.

Yes, we do think we'll "figure it out". But that's because we are accustomed to the - when you think about it - astounding advances in medical practice over the past century.

I mean...the docs in 1919 understood the germ theory of disease and the nature of influenza. They weren't stupid. They did what they could.

But.

At the time inoculation and vaccination was just beginning to become widespread. The notion that "oh, sure, we'll get a vaccine for that" was not just remote, it was nearly unthinkable in many cases. People died all the time from diseases we've more-or-less removed from our experience; typhus, cholera, diphtheria, measles, smallpox. That simply doesn't happen anymore.

So it's not that we "see ourselves as...immortal" or have a "culture of immortality". It's that we have internalized that what is going to kill us is a heart attack, or cancer, or an auto accident, or a random nutter with a firearm. The notion that a simple contagious disease - a sort of superflu - can kill or maim us?

THAT's insane. That's fucking creepy. That's...something that shouldn't be happening.

So we ARE not really treating this plague the way we did a century ago, but not because WE'VE changed.

It's because our fundamental baseline for medical competence and medical success has changed.

We don't expect we're going to die of cholera anymore.

So we're really pissed off and really frustrated and really afraid that this thing has become, despite all our knowledge and skills and learning, the pestilence that stalks in the darkness

10 comments:

  1. We (the USA) got off easy. Worldwide the death toll was estimated at somewhere between 17 and 50 million depending on who you believe.

    And in WW2 it is estimated that disease and famine killed 19 to 28 million.

    On the brighter side today is the 75th anniversary of VE Day. A time when the Russians and Chinese were our allies instead of our adversaries. Plus 20 other countries.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And we deliberately suppressed the death totals to "keep up morale" - hence the whole "Spanish flu" thing, because neutral Spain was one of the few European nations that reported the dying honestly.

      It is curious to think that a nation - regardless of the severity of the outbreak - that had an understanding of modern (early-modern, but still...) medicine would NOT react to epidemic disease in a more drastic way, but, again, I think the big difference IS the efficacy of medical practice. Even with their understanding, there were just way too many communicable diseases that medical practice couldn't stop in 1918-1919. Hell, systemic infection was a death sentence...and without antibiotics ANY infection could go systemic. There were so many ways you could die from disease in 1918 that it kind of makes sense that people, and governments, were more fatalistic about it.

      What's almost comical (if it wasn't so deeply fucked up) is listening to "conservatives" mewl and whine about having to wait in line outside Costco and wear a facemask and go one way down the Safeway aisles like they were mining lead in the gulag. They are the linear descendants of those Ragtime Era fatalists, as if the ensuing century of medical practice had never existed, and it was perfectly jake for thousands or tens of thousands to die so the "freedom" to play videogames at Dave and Buster's could ring.

      Delete
  2. Mike: "On the brighter side today is the 75th anniversary of VE Day. A time when the Russians and Chinese were our allies instead of our adversaries. Plus 20 other countries."

    True but you need to remember that they were our allies due to scary bad enemies and high quality US leadership. Neither exist today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pluto -

      Plus it was long before the manipulation of the media. Sure we have long had the yellow press but now the manipulation has become pandemic.

      And it was long before we were gifted with so-called 'Social' Media, which has turned out to be Goebbels dream forum.

      Delete
    2. ???? This would be the media that turned The Butcher Red Stalin into kindly Uncle Joe? The ones that wouldn't show FDR in his wheelchair? The ones that pretended that JFK wasn't fucking anything he could catch?

      I dunno about the manipulation - wasn't it Churchill who made the "bodyguard of lies" comment? I'll agree that the Internet turned out to be, along with all the usefulness of it, a wretched hive of social media scum and villainy. But I'd disagree about the "manipulation"; that's as old as Hammurabi...

      Delete
    3. I'll agree that mind-shaping or -manipulation has been around forever. Probably dates back to Turkana Boy, or Lucy Australopithecus. But none of history compels me to believe that any of the previous influence ops were more than a pimple on a Sergeant Major's ass compared to what is going on today.

      FDR only used his wheelchair in private. And although JFK undoubtedly broke some marriage vows, much of what has been said of his sexual romps are pure BS. I don't see any media manipulation in either case, except perhaps the exaggeration JFK's hanky-panky after his death. Stalin's Uncle Joe persona was something he himself pushed. All his biographers claim that although ruthless he could be charming, including Kotkin, McCauley, McDermott, Montefiore, and Service. Stalin cracking jokes and smoking his pipe reminded many of their own uncle.

      So the journalists of those days you mention maybe were economical with the truth. Prevarication perhaps, or they thought they were like Socrates' noble lies? Or lying by omission instead of the firehose of outright lies, fake news, and disinformation going on today. And todays lies reach a greater audience with: twitter, facebook, youtube, whatsApp, instagram, and many other not-so-social media in addition to faux news and talk radio and many blogs.

      Delete
  3. I don't think your perspective is that far off from the LGM essay, perhaps just coming at it from a different angle.

    Yes, we are - collectively - afraid because we've grown so accustomed to our technology protecting us from mother nature and here mother nature has kicked the door in yelling "suprise motherfucker!" We thought we were "immortal" from these kinds of diseases and we're finding out the hard way that we're not.

    And I think we have changed since 1919 and not just in terms of our view on mortality, but on a host of other issues that have a material effect on how we are dealing with this pandemic compared to earlier ones. I think you're right about medical technology too given that a lot of the policy measures taken today are specifically designed to manage medical resources.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's kind of the thing, though - as I replied to mike above, in 1919 there were a crap-ton of diseases that'd kill you. Or maim you; tuberculosis? Welcome to a lifetime of dodging colds and rain and smog, of trying desperately to find work in Arizona so your lungs would clear up. So the idea of just trudging along through an epidemic? What was the option? I'm sure it was grievous and awful, people mourning lost family and friends. They wanted to be immortal, too...but the alternatives? Just weren't there yet.

      But for us they are. We've had close calls, but until now we've dodged them. That's why this seems so desperately...unfair. It's the fucking indignity of going out to some lousy pangolin crud. It's like we've geared up for the boss fight only to have some two hit-dice rat person slip a shiv into our kidneys. What a cheap, rotten way to go...

      Delete
  4. I find it weird that tobacco-related deaths get tolerated so naturally. Mankind truly got used to that mass slaughter.
    https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/index.htm
    All tobacco companies and sellers deserve to be treated like heroin producers and sellers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, it's like the other stupid/dangerous things we "like"; alcohol, firearms, fast cars. We're perfectly willing to tolerate a ton of stupid, useless death for the sake of those "fun" things. People. Go figure...

      Delete