In the Asian Flu of 1957-58, They Rejected Lockdowns
(www.aier.org)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (4)
sorted by:
"It killed between 1 and 4 million people worldwide, and 116,000 in the US in a time with half the population. It was a leading contributor to a year in which the US saw 62,000 excess deaths.
Globally, it might have been five times as deadly as Covid-19, as measured by deaths per capita. It was unusually lethal for younger people: 40 percent of deaths had occurred among people younger than 65, whereas the average age of death Covid-19 is 80 with only 10-20% of deaths under the age of 65.
What’s striking is how public health officials handled the pandemic. It had a diametrically opposite response than policymakers pursued in 2020. One might assume that this was due to negligence and a lack of sophistication in understanding the need to lockdown. Surely they didn’t know 65 years ago what we know today!
Actually, this is completely false. Public health experts did in fact consider school closures, business closures, and a ban of public events but the entire ethos of the profession rejected them. There were two grounds for this rejection: lockdowns would be too disruptive, disabling the capacity of medical professionals to deal competently with the crisis, and also because such policies would be futile because the virus was already here and spreading."
I think the '68 - '69 Hong Kong Flu a decade later was similar... up to 4 million dead world wide and 100k dead in the US, and despite that no lockdowns and they even had Woodstock in '69 -- obviously no masks, no social distancing bullshit.