4 ms·

I don't think in 1889 they used masks, social distancing and quatantines but also travel was much less back then. We just don't know how much % of the populati

by raducu 6y ago

I don't think in 1889 they used masks, social distancing and quatantines but also travel was much less back then. We just don't know how much % of the population got that virus then so we can't really compare.

nradov 6y ago
Travel was less common and slower, but that hardly matters. All it takes is one index case to start exponential spread in each population center. Even in 1889 steamships and railroads were common and allowed people to travel hundreds of miles per day. There's no way to prove it now but I suspect the worldwide infection rate was quite high within a year.
- CaptArmchair 6y ago
  fwiw, the 1889 pandemic returned in 1890 and even re-appeared as late as 1892 with subsequent waves being more deadly then the first. > The initial 1890 outbreak subsided after six weeks. However, the disease returned the next year and caused nearly twice as many deaths and also reappeared in 1892. The Registrar General calculated the death toll in 1890 as 27,000, in 1891 as 58,000 and in 1892 as 25,000. > These second and third waves are worrying given that we are still in the first outbreak of Covid-19. Honigsbaum expresses caution, however. “The claim that the ‘Russian influenza’ pandemic could have been due to a coronavirus is intriguing, if speculative. Certainly, one of the pandemic’s key features was the way it attacked the nervous system, sparking remarkable cases of depression, psychosis and insomnia.” One notable victim was another prime minister, Lord Rosebery, who was laid up for six weeks in 1895 with a crippling fatigue. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/31/did-a-coronavirus-cause-the-pandemic-that-killed-queen-victorias-heir https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/31/did-a-coronavi... > There's no way to prove it now but I suspect the worldwide infection rate was quite high within a year. Worldwide, that might be hard. But for Europe, there's archival material that helps paint a picture: > Results: The spread of the pandemic was extremely rapid, with a starting point at St Petersburg (peak date = December 7. 1889). The UK and Scottish cities were hit only 6 weeks later. The mean speed of the front wave was approximately 300 Km/Week. The mean basic reproduction rate was 2.15 (range: 2.04–2.32). The mean peak value of the mortality curves was +105% above the base value (range 10%: Christiania to 221%: Brunn). The highest reproduction rates were observed at Stuttgart, St Petersburg, and Amsterdam. https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)00369-X/fulltext https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)00369-X/ful...
- fulafel 6y ago
  It matters because local infections could flare and die down without leaving the area. Travel speed is most significant in incentivizing more and farther travel.
CaptArmchair 6y ago
> I don't think in 1889 they used masks, social distancing and quatantines but also travel was much less back then. They did. I can't quite find something about masks, but social distancing and quarantining: certainly. > One major way of controlling Russian flu’s spread was self-quarantine. As with today, nineteenth-century doctors asked flu patients to keep themselves from society. “Every patient who is attacked by influenza ought certainly to keep within doors,” asserted one English physician. And: > Quarantine can be just as frightening as the disease itself, making it a target for humorous relief. One such cartoon from Funny Folks occurred early in the epidemic. The illustration depicts an aristocratic lady with influenza soliciting a dance from one of two healthy gentlemen standing in front of her. The lady continually sneezes as she tries to explain how she had not “probised Captaid Bodtgobery” the next “dadse,” and so she was free to “dadse” with someone else. This lady evokes the distress of British socialites as they tried to traverse society during Russian flu. The scene’s backdrop adds to this distress. Everyone stands around the ballroom with red noses, and many hold handkerchiefs near their faces in anticipation of the next sneeze, showing how these socialites chose class duties over convalescence and containment. Even though "social distancing" wasn't used as a clear phrase. In 1889, the prevailing theories about the spread of disease revolved around "miasma's" in the air. The 1880's is the same timeframe in which a handful pioneers first discovered viruses as a distinct organism. It would take a few more decades before classic theories would be replaced by modern virology and bacteriology. The 1850-1880's was also the same time when people like Joseph Lister, Florence Nightingale and Franz Semelweiss would make the first strides towards introducing hygiene in hospitals which curbed mortality (even though this was often met with fierce opposition by the incumbent medical establishment at the time). The entire article is a must-read really: https://nursingclio.org/2020/03/24/joking-in-the-time-of-pandemic-the-1889-92-flu-and-2020-covid-19/ https://nursingclio.org/2020/03/24/joking-in-the-time-of-pan...

by raducu 6y ago

nradov 6y ago

Travel was less common and slower, but that hardly matters. All it takes is one index case to start exponential spread in each population center. Even in 1889 steamships and railroads were common and allowed people to travel hundreds of miles per day. There's no way to prove it now but I suspect the worldwide infection rate was quite high within a year.

CaptArmchair 6y ago
fwiw, the 1889 pandemic returned in 1890 and even re-appeared as late as 1892 with subsequent waves being more deadly then the first. > The initial 1890 outbreak subsided after six weeks. However, the disease returned the next year and caused nearly twice as many deaths and also reappeared in 1892. The Registrar General calculated the death toll in 1890 as 27,000, in 1891 as 58,000 and in 1892 as 25,000. > These second and third waves are worrying given that we are still in the first outbreak of Covid-19. Honigsbaum expresses caution, however. “The claim that the ‘Russian influenza’ pandemic could have been due to a coronavirus is intriguing, if speculative. Certainly, one of the pandemic’s key features was the way it attacked the nervous system, sparking remarkable cases of depression, psychosis and insomnia.” One notable victim was another prime minister, Lord Rosebery, who was laid up for six weeks in 1895 with a crippling fatigue. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/31/did-a-coronavirus-cause-the-pandemic-that-killed-queen-victorias-heir https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/31/did-a-coronavi... > There's no way to prove it now but I suspect the worldwide infection rate was quite high within a year. Worldwide, that might be hard. But for Europe, there's archival material that helps paint a picture: > Results: The spread of the pandemic was extremely rapid, with a starting point at St Petersburg (peak date = December 7. 1889). The UK and Scottish cities were hit only 6 weeks later. The mean speed of the front wave was approximately 300 Km/Week. The mean basic reproduction rate was 2.15 (range: 2.04–2.32). The mean peak value of the mortality curves was +105% above the base value (range 10%: Christiania to 221%: Brunn). The highest reproduction rates were observed at Stuttgart, St Petersburg, and Amsterdam. https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)00369-X/fulltext https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)00369-X/ful...
fulafel 6y ago
It matters because local infections could flare and die down without leaving the area. Travel speed is most significant in incentivizing more and farther travel.

CaptArmchair 6y ago

> I don't think in 1889 they used masks, social distancing and quatantines but also travel was much less back then. They did. I can't quite find something about masks, but social distancing and quarantining: certainly. > One major way of controlling Russian flu’s spread was self-quarantine. As with today, nineteenth-century doctors asked flu patients to keep themselves from society. “Every patient who is attacked by influenza ought certainly to keep within doors,” asserted one English physician. And: > Quarantine can be just as frightening as the disease itself, making it a target for humorous relief. One such cartoon from Funny Folks occurred early in the epidemic. The illustration depicts an aristocratic lady with influenza soliciting a dance from one of two healthy gentlemen standing in front of her. The lady continually sneezes as she tries to explain how she had not “probised Captaid Bodtgobery” the next “dadse,” and so she was free to “dadse” with someone else. This lady evokes the distress of British socialites as they tried to traverse society during Russian flu. The scene’s backdrop adds to this distress. Everyone stands around the ballroom with red noses, and many hold handkerchiefs near their faces in anticipation of the next sneeze, showing how these socialites chose class duties over convalescence and containment. Even though "social distancing" wasn't used as a clear phrase. In 1889, the prevailing theories about the spread of disease revolved around "miasma's" in the air. The 1880's is the same timeframe in which a handful pioneers first discovered viruses as a distinct organism. It would take a few more decades before classic theories would be replaced by modern virology and bacteriology. The 1850-1880's was also the same time when people like Joseph Lister, Florence Nightingale and Franz Semelweiss would make the first strides towards introducing hygiene in hospitals which curbed mortality (even though this was often met with fierce opposition by the incumbent medical establishment at the time). The entire article is a must-read really: https://nursingclio.org/2020/03/24/joking-in-the-time-of-pandemic-the-1889-92-flu-and-2020-covid-19/ https://nursingclio.org/2020/03/24/joking-in-the-time-of-pan...