A century, they separated two of the most catastrophic infectious disease outbreaks in contemporary history: the 1918 flu pandemic and the 2019–2020 COVID-19 pandemic. Though caused by different viruses, the two pandemics share many aspects, including clinical, pathological, and epidemiological traits and standard medical, public health, and societal responses. Events of this kind occurred in 1918 and 1919, contributing to the worldwide influenza pandemic. This research examines the 1918 flu pandemic reactions and their relevance to current COVID-19 pandemic concerns, including vaccines, masks, quarantines, and protests.
In the US, during the flu epidemics of 1918 and 1919, masks represented political and cultural tensions. People called the masks “dirt traps,” “germ shields,” and “mufflers.” They gave each person a “pig-like snout.” The first line of protection against the 1918 flu pandemic in the United States, which struck more than a century ago, was face masks of cheesecloth and gauze (Ofori-Parku, 2021). The masks inflamed political tensions even further, as they do now. Physicians have long supported using face masks as a preventative measure against infectious illnesses. Some people fought then, as they are now.
Masks became a scapegoat and a symbol of government overreach in 1918 and 1919 as bars, saloons, restaurants, theaters, and schools closed. These events sparked protests, petitions, and defiant bare-face gatherings. This was the period of a horrific pandemic that was killing thousands of Americans. Additionally, masks are a component of a series of preventive and control measures to keep the COVID-19 virus in check (Chu et al., 2020). By reducing the amount of infectious particles inhaled or breathed, masks aid in halting the spread of respiratory illnesses in public areas. These particles may spread when an infected individual sneezes, coughs, screams, talks, or sings.
Packed public places, such as troop ships and movie theaters, were linked to the 1918 flu epidemic from the very beginning. Even though the sick had to be segregated, more widespread techniques had to be added to the quarantine protocols to manage public spaces’ congestion. The influenza pandemic, a recurring theme in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, heightened the contrast between the haven of the house and the dangerous public space (Cimino, n.d.). Strict individual controls around coughing, sneezing, and spitting in public areas were prioritized since modern health citizenship was thought to require ongoing awareness of these behaviors. Quarantining people is also considered an effective tactic in the early stages of an outbreak (Cimino n.d.). Quarantine was also recommended as a critical precaution against the coronavirus epidemic and was implemented. The COVID-19 virus mainly spreads in close-knit communities through respiratory droplets expelled when an infected person sneezes or coughs or comes into contact with contaminated surfaces and touching one’s face. Identifying likely carriers within a community during the COVID-19 pandemic was tough. Because the sickness spreads via social contact, it was ideal if everyone performed self-quarantining to the maximum degree possible. Canceling large parties and dine-in services was a good beginning, but in the end, it was up to each person to take the necessary steps to keep their distance from one another and prevent personal connections.
Identifying the influenza virus in the 1930s marked the beginning of real work toward an effective vaccine, which laid the groundwork for the initial immunization attempts during the 1918 influenza pandemic. In both cases, there were delays in immunization, diagnosis, and treatment. Many states developed their COVID-19 diagnostic test since the CDC’s first test was unproven (Rav et al., 2020). Antivirals such as remdesivir, antibodies, and interleukin 33 blockers are under investigation; nevertheless, the FDA has not approved any COVID-19 treatments. Additionally, vaccinations are being developed. In 1918, pneumonia had proved so difficult to cure that even the renowned William Osler recommended bleeding to manage symptoms. Like current COVID-19 containment measures, the worldwide campaign to organize the virus primarily relied on isolation and quarantine because of the lack of influenza vaccination and medications for treating subsequent bacterial infections.
Around the globe, people gathered to oppose the COVID-19 vaccination legislation. Protesters throughout Western Europe took to the streets in response to what they saw as the government’s plans to restrict the rights of the unvaccinated (Mizushima, 2023). Similar protests occurred during the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic when individuals, business owners, religious leaders, and even elected officials rebelled against public health orders and were more uneasy with the ongoing measures. They also tried to have the orders revoked.
Conclusively, the 1918 flu pandemic and the 2019–2020 COVID-19 pandemic are two of the most catastrophic infectious disease outbreaks in history. Protests resulted from the use of masks as a preventative measure. Prioritized were crowded public places and strict individual controls. The COVID-19 pandemic spreads through close-knit communities, making self-quarantining essential. Vaccinations relied on isolation and quarantine, leading to protests against vaccination legislation and public health orders.
References
Chu, D. K., Akl, E. A., Duda, S., Solo, K., Yaacoub, S., Schünemann, H. J., … & Reinap, M. (2020). Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The lancet, 395(10242), 1973-1987.
Cimino, E. New York City and the 1918 Influenza Pandemic.
Mizushima, J. (2023). Social Justice and the Response to the COVID-19 Crisis in European Countries. In Social Fairness in a Post-Pandemic World: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 99-123). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
Ofori-Parku, G. M. (2021). Understanding the 1918-1920 Cultural Narrative of the Spanish Flu as Told through the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal (Master’s thesis, Marquette University).
Ravi, N., Cortade, D. L., Ng, E., & Wang, S. X. (2020). Diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A comprehensive review of the FDA-EUA COVID-19 testing landscape. Biosensors and bioelectronics, 165, 112454.
write