To be very concerned that the UK is not yet closing schools or introducing other quarantining measures, despite clear evidence that in 1918, it reduced total deaths by as much as 50% in cities that

[effingterrified]

The 1918-19 Spanish flu pandemic infected a third of the planet’s population and killed an estimated 50 million people. The number of Americans who died of the Spanish flu was greater than the number of Americans killed in both World Wars. However, not all US cities suffered as badly as others. Research published in 2007 (at a time of heightened interest due to the avian flu outbreak) explored how cities across the US had responded in 1918, and the impacts this had had on mortality rates.

St Louis and Philadelphia provide good examples of how different approaches to public health led to radically differing outcomes. In Philadelphia, where the disease struck in September, authorities were slow to realise the threat posed by the virus, and allowed large public gatherings, including a citywide parade, involving 200,000 people in support of a World War I loan drive, to take place as planned. In four months, more than 12,000 Philadelphians died, an excess death rate of 719 people for every 100,000 inhabitants
.
In St Louis, on the other hand, two weeks before Philadelphia officials began to react, the highly-experienced Health Commissioner, Dr. Max Starkloff, insisted that the city cancel all public gatherings, from football games to Halloween parties, close all schools for ten weeks, and even station police officers in department stores to keep people from lingering. St Louis made the mistake of reacting to an initial fall in cases by lifting controls, leading to a second wave of the illness; however controls were immediately reinstituted.

Excess deaths in St. Louis were 347 per 100,000 people, LESS THAN HALF the rate in Philadelphia. Early action appeared to have saved thousands of lives.

The 2007 studies used mathematical models to show that such large differences in death rates could be explained by the ways the cities carried out prevention measures, especially in their timing. Cities that instituted quarantine, closing schools and banning public gatherings and other such procedures early in the epidemic, had peak death rates 30 percent to 50 percent lower than those that did not.

A study examining the course of the epidemic in 23 cities across the US found that San Francisco, St. Louis, Milwaukee and Kansas City, Mo., had the most effective prevention programs, and time was of the essence. If restrictions were introduced too late or lifted too early, success rates declined substantially.

Just because you close schools and children stay home, the adult population still have to work so they can easily carry the virus from the workplace to home and spread it to their kids. So quarantining schools makes no sense.

Also anyone using Spanish flu as a comparison needs to remember life expectancy in the uk then was 50 years old so anyone over 35 would have been in a high risk category... its like comparing apples and oranges!

Why are people convinced that “hundreds of thousands” will die? So far in the UK there have been 3 deaths. And that’s without a vaccine and without any major restrictions on movement, no shutdowns of schools, etc. They haven’t even gern dying in huge numbers in countries where good sanitation and access to clean water are not as prevalent as the UK.
The cases are not doubling every day, as some doom and gloom types predicted. It’s not wiping out large numbers of people. More than 80% who have it had very mild symptoms.

But carry on buying all the toilet paper and pasta you can fit into your car if it makes you feel better.

I agree with you OP.

It is the lack of 'long term' planning that is astounding to me.

Clearly we need to maintain some infrastructure, energy, NHS for critical and long term management of health conditions, food supply but everything else COULD be restricted to prevent the spread of the disease now.

What is the point in allowing a large number of people to become infected BEFORE putting in restrictions which are completely inevitable if the magic number becomes infected.

I have an old Uni Friend in Singapore, they seem to have taken a very practical approach and appear to be managing the spread of the disease well.

My kids are home ed and I am seriously considering going on lockdown for a while

Circumstances were very different with Spanish flu. For one thing, it was very unusual in that it most affected healthy, young, fit people because it caused the immune system to attack itself. Coronavirus has very low fatality for the majority of people. Spanish flu also had a higher virulence than Coronavirus appears to have, and it was massively boosted by widespread malnourishment, poor hygiene, overcrowding, poor public health, lack of access to healthcare and poor living conditions. These are not widespread issues in the UK these days. Closing schools etc would be premature given the very serious impact it could have.

I agree with you OP but unfortunately these people who are so rudely criticising anyone who isn't carrying on 'as normal' won't understand the concept of exponential growth in case numbers until it's already exploded.

Troubling amount of ignorance and complacency but they won't be told. Just give it a month or so.

Oh goody, yet another thread about closing schools. As if the umpteen already running weren’t enough.

Honestly @mnhq when are you going to stop all these ridiculous duplicate threads or even better have ONE thread running on this virus. The 3 ring circus on here is bloody ludicrous.

If I was this government, I would be putting plans in place to say to businesses "you will be expected to have all staff work from home where they are predominantly computer-based unless you can provide a strong business case for why its not possible for individual staff".

My place is very old fashioned and requires all people to be in the office when at least 3/4 of all our staff could work from home as effectively.

The conservative estimate is 100,000 deaths. This is from the experts advising the government. It includes 20,000 we would usually expect to die from flu/cold so an additional 80,000.
We don't definitely know coronavirus' mortality rate yet because we don't have enough data.
The amount of 'fake news' posters accusing people of 'panicking' simply because we understand the facts and emergency planning, is very tedious. I'm starting to wonder if Boris is paying them. But perhaps I'm just in denial that so many people don't understand projections, don't trust experts, and presumably think other countries have introduced airport controls, shut schools and put areas in lockdown just for a joke.

Agree, Magicians, I can't help wondering if it's paid disinformation, because I don't believe a) that people are that stupid and b) that people who genuinely are not bothered about the coronavirus are going to have bothered to search out a not very obvious bit of MN just to post on threads they aren't interested in

Not buying it, sorry.

I agree with you both, I'm pretty dim, low IQ. Not ashamed and there's nothing I can do about it.
Maths and Science isn't my thing at all, and even I bloody get it.

The ostriches are getting very tiresome I have to say.

Sorry you are getting a hard time op. I think we will bitterly regret not shutting the schools.

Well if we were facing the Spanish flu without modern medicine I’d agree with you but we aren’t.

@TheMagiciansMewTwo if you understood the facts then you’d realise that we don’t have many facts at all. We don’t know the general mortality rate, we don’t know the transmission rate, we don’t know if and when there will be a vaccine, we don’t know how other countries will react (and therefore how long we’d have to impose draconian measures), we don’t know what will happen when the weather warms, we don’t know if anyone has any immunity to this disease. Every estimate we have and every figure we have (except mortality rate amongst hospitalisations although even this has huge variables) is either a best estimate or incomplete data. What are the facts here? There is a disease. It has x known systems. It kills some people. None of us can understand the facts if we don’t have them. Instead of calling people stupid maybe you should recognise that everyone is still in a state of ignorance and will be for some time yet. Some people will naturally look at worst case scenario estimates, others will choose conservative estimates, others will assume that estimates are overblown. We are all acting on assumptions and incomplete data.

@BritWifeinUSA 5 people have died in the uk..

Well if we were facing the Spanish flu without modern medicine I’d agree with you but we aren’t.

But there’s no medicine that helps with this virus is there?

Someone else said that the Spanish flu was pre antibiotics. But Corona doesn’t respond to antibiotics as it’s a virus.

Our school in Wales shuts on April 3rd so nearly 4 weeks away. GCSE Exams start on May 5th. We have many vulnerable pupils who rely on us for support as well as a free hot meal.
So in would rather we didn't close to be honest, even with the news from Italy this evening.

@Dusty01 if there is no medical intervention that can improve survival rates then why are people bothering hospitalising and treating victims. Think it through. People are dying of all kinds of complications. Even things as rudimentary as saline drips and ventilators will save some people.

For those with mild to moderate cases they will only need support measures such as ibuprofen/paracetamol to bring down a fever, staying hydrated, getting rest, etc. Antivirals can be given. A virus can cause secondary bacterial infections which can be treated with antibiotics.

Five people locally have it, all are linked to one another and all except the most recent case are caring for themselves at home, the most recent one is in hospital as they are elderly and are very unwell with it however the family have said this person is responding to the medications being given.

People have not figured in that there will be a lot of 16-21 year olds who are not in work who will be available to assist with familial childcare. Of course, it won't pair up perfectly, but I recall when I grew up in the 70s it was perfectly normal for one of the neighbour's teenage daughters to come and babysit three of us children whilst my parents got in from work.

You got us there op, we've all been paid by the government to spread misinformation on your thread. Your amazing insight into the subject is that important. Nothing to do with the fact you first posted in aibu, or that the panic topic has taken over active threads.

It has nothing to do with being ostriches. It's simply that some of us understand how the economy and infrastructure work, and the risks if they are threatened.

Mild to moderate means pneumonia. Not what most people understand as “moderate”.

School doesn’t break up where I am until April. I want to take my dc out now, but the elder is doing GCSEs .
Very worried.

Mild to moderate does not necessarily mean pneumonia as not everyone who contracts COVID-19 will go on to develop pneumonia. Of those who do develop pneumonia, not all will require hospitalisation as they will have "walking pneumonia" (aka, mild pneumonia). Some people will of course need treatment in hospital but not all.