4 ms·

I wonder how Covid compares to the bubonic plague. It remains endemic in some parts of Asia (so not disappeared), it is zoonotic (rodents, even cute squirrels i

I wonder how Covid compares to the bubonic plague. It remains endemic in some parts of Asia (so not disappeared), it is zoonotic (rodents, even cute squirrels in some parts of the US), killed off something like 1/3rd of Europe’s population, and... is generally a non-event nowadays. Not a pretty comparison if valid, of course. But that was what would be a nightmare scenario for Covid: letting the disease rip through a populous continent. And yet it burnt out eventually, over the course of 7 years, according to Wikipedia. For the most part, anyway. Bubonic plague outbreaks continued for centuries, but never again was there a continent-wide pandemic.

hellisothers 5y ago
Isn’t that partially because some people had better resistance to it and the survivors passed it on? https://www.studyfinds.org/bubonic-plague-human-immunity/ https://www.studyfinds.org/bubonic-plague-human-immunity/
- rich_sasha 5y ago
  Maybe. This could happen with Covid too. Not a pretty scenario! But better than deadly-remains-forever.
candiodari 5y ago
Is this a trap question? I mean you can make 2 cases. Firstly the noncontroversial part: covid is a virus, bubonic plague is a bacterium. In the covid case, infected people infect others. Stay away from people, especially in restaurants (so, probably, eating near an infected person is a strong vector), and there isn't much chance of infection. In the case of bubonic plague: enter a building where an infected person had a shit 2 months before ... there's a decent chance you get infected. It's a world of difference. Objects are safe, with covid. Streets are safe. Beds are safe. Public toilets are safe. Public toilets would be a death trap with the bubonic plague. You ignore age? They're comparable in death rate. You only count people under 40 (life expectancy, without bubonic plague, was only about 30-40 years when bubonic plague got it's big moment). So if you compare that to what covid does to people <40, it's much less than the mildest flu ... Let's say you relax that by a lot and say, no people live to 70 in the 14th century, about double the real figure ... covid is about an average flu. So ... like everything, it depends. If you make a case based on years lost, covid is an exceptionally deadly flu, but less than 1% as bad as the bubonic plague. If you make a better comparison, and compare Covid to Tuberculosis, today, then for the first 4 months it got to about half as bad as TBC, then fell off a cliff. If you take an average over a year, TBC wins on all fronts: people infected, people killed, years of life destroyed, ... well, except on dollars spent. BUT covid kills many rich old people in the west. Tuberculosis kills young poor adults, mostly in the third world. Tuberculosis produces orphans. Not that I don't think rich people in the west they have right to a few more years, they very much do. But you want to help humanity, it's the wrong target. So Covid only really wins from even contemporary diseases in the "dollars resisting the deaths" department.

hellisothers 5y ago

Isn’t that partially because some people had better resistance to it and the survivors passed it on? https://www.studyfinds.org/bubonic-plague-human-immunity/ https://www.studyfinds.org/bubonic-plague-human-immunity/

rich_sasha 5y ago
Maybe. This could happen with Covid too. Not a pretty scenario! But better than deadly-remains-forever.

candiodari 5y ago

Is this a trap question? I mean you can make 2 cases. Firstly the noncontroversial part: covid is a virus, bubonic plague is a bacterium. In the covid case, infected people infect others. Stay away from people, especially in restaurants (so, probably, eating near an infected person is a strong vector), and there isn't much chance of infection. In the case of bubonic plague: enter a building where an infected person had a shit 2 months before ... there's a decent chance you get infected. It's a world of difference. Objects are safe, with covid. Streets are safe. Beds are safe. Public toilets are safe. Public toilets would be a death trap with the bubonic plague. You ignore age? They're comparable in death rate. You only count people under 40 (life expectancy, without bubonic plague, was only about 30-40 years when bubonic plague got it's big moment). So if you compare that to what covid does to people <40, it's much less than the mildest flu ... Let's say you relax that by a lot and say, no people live to 70 in the 14th century, about double the real figure ... covid is about an average flu. So ... like everything, it depends. If you make a case based on years lost, covid is an exceptionally deadly flu, but less than 1% as bad as the bubonic plague. If you make a better comparison, and compare Covid to Tuberculosis, today, then for the first 4 months it got to about half as bad as TBC, then fell off a cliff. If you take an average over a year, TBC wins on all fronts: people infected, people killed, years of life destroyed, ... well, except on dollars spent. BUT covid kills many rich old people in the west. Tuberculosis kills young poor adults, mostly in the third world. Tuberculosis produces orphans. Not that I don't think rich people in the west they have right to a few more years, they very much do. But you want to help humanity, it's the wrong target. So Covid only really wins from even contemporary diseases in the "dollars resisting the deaths" department.