Skip to main content

Lethality of SARS-CoV-2 aka COVID

 +
JMJ

 

[I am waiting on book, but will post this article as-is at the end of October ... and update as necessary]

 

Back in April I was discussing the lethality of SARS-CoV-2 compared with other diseases.

At that point I wrote: 

 For the Spanish Influenza the data is estimated at greater than 2.5% ... see this 2006 NIH article (link)), NIH 1918 Influenza: The Mother of all Pandemics - table below p19 (link), and WHO Pandemic Influenza Risk Management (link).

 Nota Bene: The footnote on the Spanish Flu CFR listed below is that this is for the USA. The world wide data is probably unreliable due to the lack of records.  I'm guessing that the USA data below is more reliable as the US had better records.

(See WHO Graph below)

Side Note: Something  has been bothering me for a while. Why is the American CFR for Spanish Influenza between 2-3% ... it would seem the COVID-19 - while not as bad as H1N1-1918 - it is in the same league.  I will be digging into this more in another article. (Note: Links to a couple of papers that started me down this path: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7318986/ and https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30484-9/fulltext

I have been doing some additional research and decided that it would be beneficial to publish my research and conclusions.

______________________________________________

                            Part 1 Sources of Data                             

McKinsey

 

I first came across this graphic in the early days of the pandemic and thought it was useful.  However, I was thrown off by the scales used to compress the data. I found it useful to provide context vs other diseases, such as the 1918 influenza pandemic.  However, as I dug into the data, it didn't quite jive, so I did some more digging.

WHO Report (page 19)


https://www.who.int/influenza/preparedness/pandemic/GIP_PandemicInfluenzaRiskManagementInterimGuidance_Jun2013.pdf?ua=1
 

The scale that McKinsey used and the emergence of some serological studies from Germany set me off in the search for more comparative data.  This table from the a WHO 2013 influenza planning report set me off as the CFR for the 1918 Spanish Flu was estimated to at between 2-3%. This is close that of SARS-CoV-2 in some regions so it caused me to re-evaluate some of my earlier thoughts and ... of course keep digging.  The great thing about the report is that they had references for the CFR!

I have ordered the book cited in #30 and look forward to reading it. 

So here's the reason this finding tweaked my interest.  I had thought that the 1918 epidemic had a much higher CFR - at least on the order of 10%.  If it was indeed 2-3%, then the gap between the Spanish Flu and SARS-CoV-2 is much smaller than originally thought.  Given the devastation created by the 1918 epidemic, it would cast in a much different light the reaction of those responsible for our welfare.

Cited Sources

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17517812/

26. Pandemics of the 20th–21st centuries. Stockholm, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. (Available at: http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/healthtopics/pandemic_preparedness/basic_facts/Pages/historical_pandemics.aspx, accessed April 2013.) 

27. Vynnycky E, Trindall A, Mangtani P. Estimates of the reproduction numbers of Spanish influenza using morbidity data. International Journal of Epidemiology, 2007, 36(4):881–889

 28. Jackson C, Vynnycky E, Mangtani P. Estimates of the transmissibility of the 1918 (Hong Kong) influenza pandemic: evidence of increased transmissibility between successive waves. American Journal of Epidemiolog y, 2010, 171(4):465–478. 

29. Miller MA et al. The signature features of influenza pandemicsimplications for policy.
New England Journal of Medicine
, 2009, 360:2595–2598. 

30. Taubenberger JK, Morens DM. 1918 influenza: the mother of all pandemics. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 2006, 12(1):15–22.


 The MICROBSCOPE

https://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/the-microbescope-infectious-diseases-in-context/

 The information is beautiful site also had some interesting information and again the lower CFR was present and they provided a gift!  A link to their data along with references, which led me to the WHO table (above) and as I followed the sources, Taubenberger's book popped up a number of times regarding the lethality of the Spanish Flu.  

So I have it on order!

Spanish Influenza in the USA

 So most people have heard about the Spanish Flu Pandemic that raged across the Earth.  I used it as a meter stick for how bad things can get.  We know the COVID's IFR (0.1 to 1%), CFR (2.3%) and how does that compare with Spanish Flu?

There are huge variations in the estimated lethality of Spanish Flu 2.5 to 10% or even 20%. This variation has been noted:

 

Global death rate

How do these estimates compare with the size of the world population at the time? How large was the share who died in the pandemic?

Estimates suggest that the world population in 1918 was 1.8 billion. 

Based on this, the low estimate of 17.4 million deaths by Spreeuwenberg et al. (2018) implies that the Spanish flu killed almost 1% (0.95%) of the world population.

If we rely on the estimate of 50 million deaths published by Johnson and Mueller, it implies that the Spanish flu killed 2.7% of the world population. And if it was in fact higher – 100 million as these authors suggest – then the global death rate would have been 5.4%. 

The world population was growing by around 13 million every year in this period which suggests that the period of the Spanish flu was likely the last time in history when the world population was declining.
Source: The Spanish flu (1918-20): The global impact of the largest influenza pandemic in history

Here's a good comparison from that article ...


 I am not the only one making comparisons between 1918 and 2020.

Any mortality comparisons between these two pandemics in the United States, 2020 and 1918, must differentiate between totals and rates. The current US population, a little more than 330 million, is more than three times larger than the population in 1918, estimated at 105 million. The 675,000 deaths attributed to the influenza epidemic made up 0.64 percent of the total population, a little more than six in every thousand people. By contrast, the more than 500,000 deaths attributed to COVID-19 make up about 0.15 percent of the total population, or between one and two in every thousand people. If COVID-19 caused deaths at the same rate as the 1918 epidemic, the total would approach two million. Even the disturbing projections of more than to 600,000 deaths by July 1, 2021, would still remain below the rates recorded in the earlier epidemic.

 It is important to recognize that we don’t know precisely how many people died of “Spanish flu.” Measuring influenza deaths is complicated because this disease often contributes to deaths attributed to other primary causes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Pneumonia and Influenza Mortality Surveillance combines two causes into one reporting category. Most reports during the “Spanish flu” anticipated this practice by combining influenza and pneumonia deaths together, thus recognizing that the epidemic produced more deaths than were just attributed to influenza. We see a similar pattern today, as the actual count of pandemic deaths should include far more than those attributed specifically to COVID-19. Source: Measuring Mortality In The Pandemics Of 1918–19 And 2020–21

 

 

______________________________________________

                                     Part 2 Thoughts                              

First I don't know how the Spanish Influenza CFR of  2.5-3% value was arrived at, however the variation in deaths makes this well within the realm of possibility. I look forward to reading Marks and Beatty's book Epidemics (on order), with the goal of understanding how this number is derived.

I also remember reading a report from the 1920's describing the deaths a region of the US and that the CFR was on the order of 2.5%.  So, I am inclined to believe that the CFR >3% may be more accurate than the numbers that could be conflated with deaths due to WW2.

 


                                     Part 3 Conclusions                             

For me, this comparison is useful to put SARS-CoV-2 into the context of treating disease in the 21st century.

The numbers are consistent with SARS-CoV-2 being a significant health emergency, if not on the same level as 1918 when young people were dying in 24hrs, at least on the potential impact on society in terms of deaths.

I wonder how many people would have survived if the 1918 pandemic have been the 2021 pandemic.

P^3

References

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

 + JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas.  After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP.  Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

 + JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'.  This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium.  If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 8 - Convention Centre Chapel

 + JMJ I came to Tradition a few years after they had bought a chapel. My wife told me of the earlier years when Fr. Normandin would come to town and Mass would be held in a room at the convention centre.  He'd start by blessing the room and then proceed with Mass. This went on for a while before the one of the faithful found a small hall that would suit just fine. They pooled their money and bought the building.  Then came the work as the retiree's refinished the floor, setup the sactuary. Oh, did I mention that I heard that the hall had been used by a motorcycle gang? The floor needed a lot of work.  I remember seeing pictures of the founders working to make the hall into a fitting place for the Sacrifice of the Mass. That little chapel would be a refuge like many others serviced by Fr. Normandin.  From Thunderbay, Ontrario to Nanaimo, British Columbia - the SSPX chapels are all the results of Fr. Normandin's missionary work in those desperate times. Without h...

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD!

 + JMJ How many more must die for the throne? (Movie Quote: Prince Caspian) The Spread of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt I've seen a lot of FUD spreading across the intergnat on various stats etc.   So let's put this in context ... especially the perspective of those people in positions of authority who need to make decisions to protect the lives of their citizens. Yep, this is going to be that type of post.  Like it or not the leaders of our governments have their authority from God.  So, as Catholics should know, you need to have a very good reason to deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors. This is basic St. Thomas Aquinas ... so don't blame me for discussing things from a Catholic perspective. The leaders of our countries have taken action to protect the vulnerable of our countries.   As much as the young and not-so-young may whine and complain - I have to ask how many more of our elderly have to die? What the armchair virologists and ec...