What was the 1968-1969 Hong Kong Flu pandemic that killed over a million people like?

[CatManTrue]

I just checked... all football games were played despite a serious flu pandemic that may have killed 4 million globally. (As Northwestern went 1-9, it’s a season most fans probably tried to forget.)

Woodstock even happened during it!

So do any posters recall the Hong Kong flu, and if you lived in constant terror during it? Or did life go on as normal?

(Just a note: this is meant as a serious question. No slash s required.)

 

[FeralFelidae]

There are posters here saying that the USA alone would have 1 million deaths if we hadn't shut down the economy.

Never mind that the whole world is at 660k deaths right now.

 

[fcmchi]

I just checked... all football games were played despite a serious flu pandemic that may have killed 4 million globally. (As Northwestern went 1-9, it’s a season most fans probably tried to forget.)

Woodstock even happened during it!

So do any posters recall the Hong Kong flu, and if you lived in constant terror during it? Or did life go on as normal?

(Just a note: this is meant as a serious question. No slash s required.)[/QUOTE


Cat Man,

Don’t forget the vastly different eras: no internet, maybe 1.25 hours of news a day on only about 5 TV channels here in Chicago, the upheavals caused by the war in Vietnam Nam and the fear that the Cold War between us and Russia might escalate into an A bomb dropping real war. (Interestingly the struggle for the civil rights of our minority fellow citizens was being played out then as it is now.)

Also don’t forget that both viruses are not the same.

I have no recall of the then flu even being on anyone’s radar. There were no warnings about it.

So, that flu had no influence on any of my decisions during my junior and senior years in college. I took a boat the summer of 1969 from NYC to Lisbon to study that fall in Spain. Before starting my studies I traveled all over Europe.

The Europeans weren’t concerned about it, either.

Bottom line, different era different viruses.

 

[DkeCat]

...and a lot less globalization

 

[CappyNU]

I just checked... all football games were played despite a serious flu pandemic that may have killed 4 million globally. (As Northwestern went 1-9, it’s a season most fans probably tried to forget.)

Woodstock even happened during it!

So do any posters recall the Hong Kong flu, and if you lived in constant terror during it? Or did life go on as normal?

(Just a note: this is meant as a serious question. No slash s required.)

From a source I found, seems like the bulk of the pandemic aspect happened in the US between Dec. 1968-Mar. 1969 with a less-deadly secondary wave between Nov. 1969-Jan. 1970 (https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/192/2/233/856805), so it wouldn't have really hit during football season, however another source (https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305557) says:

US influenza activity increased dramatically in October. The first reported civilian outbreak in the continental United States was identified in Needles, California, with more than one third of its population reporting ILI. ILI reports in Colorado increased from 62 cases for the week ending November 2 to 670 for the week ending November 9,11 a week in which other western states and Hawaii also reported outbreaks.12 The first outbreaks in eastern states occurred the next week. All 50 states experienced increased school absenteeism during the pandemic; 23 faced school and college closures and 31 saw elevated worker absenteeism. The peak week of influenza activity for most states fell between December 14 and January 11, with pandemic activity generally starting in the western United States and moving eastward. Newspaper articles chronicled the widespread college closures, slowdowns in business and industry, and threats to Christmas mail deliveries....National concerns were reflected in a December 19 New York Times editorial describing the pandemic as “one of the worst in the nation’s history,” bemoaning the “amount of discomfort and distress suffered by the millions who have already been hit,” and the potential for “billions of dollars” associated with treatment and lost productivity.​

Sounds like there were roughly 100,000 deaths in the US over the two waves.

 

[CatManTrue]

There are posters here saying that the USA alone would have 1 million deaths if we hadn't shut down the economy.

Never mind that the whole world is at 660k deaths right now.

...so that’s a no?

 

[CatManTrue]

Cat Man,

Don’t forget the vastly different eras: no internet, maybe 1.25 hours of news a day on only about 5 TV channels here in Chicago, the upheavals caused by the war in Vietnam Nam and the fear that the Cold War between us and Russia might escalate into an A bomb dropping real war. (Interestingly the struggle for the civil rights of our minority fellow citizens was being played out then as it is now.)

Also don’t forget that both viruses are not the same.

I have no recall of the then flu even being on anyone’s radar. There were no warnings about it.

So, that flu had no influence on any of my decisions during my junior and senior years in college. I took a boat the summer of 1969 from NYC to Lisbon to study that fall in Spain. Before starting my studies I traveled all over Europe.

The Europeans weren’t concerned about it, either.

Bottom line, different era different viruses.

I fixed it for you.

So basically the main difference is the media, globalization, and the internet / ability to work from home?

If we can keep the initial COVID-19 death toll to less than a million pre vaccine, would that be considered a success globally? Especially since there are more people now whom are connected more than ever?

 

[FeralFelidae]

...so that’s a no?

I don't know.

 

[CatManTrue]

From a source I found, seems like the bulk of the pandemic aspect happened in the US between Dec. 1968-Mar. 1969 with a less-deadly secondary wave between Nov. 1969-Jan. 1970 (https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/192/2/233/856805), so it wouldn't have really hit during football season, however another source (https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305557) says:

US influenza activity increased dramatically in October. The first reported civilian outbreak in the continental United States was identified in Needles, California, with more than one third of its population reporting ILI. ILI reports in Colorado increased from 62 cases for the week ending November 2 to 670 for the week ending November 9,11 a week in which other western states and Hawaii also reported outbreaks.12 The first outbreaks in eastern states occurred the next week. All 50 states experienced increased school absenteeism during the pandemic; 23 faced school and college closures and 31 saw elevated worker absenteeism. The peak week of influenza activity for most states fell between December 14 and January 11, with pandemic activity generally starting in the western United States and moving eastward. Newspaper articles chronicled the widespread college closures, slowdowns in business and industry, and threats to Christmas mail deliveries....National concerns were reflected in a December 19 New York Times editorial describing the pandemic as “one of the worst in the nation’s history,” bemoaning the “amount of discomfort and distress suffered by the millions who have already been hit,” and the potential for “billions of dollars” associated with treatment and lost productivity.​

Sounds like there were roughly 100,000 deaths in the US over the two waves.

At least 100,000 people died and according to another poster nobody blinked an eye during college? That’s the equivalent of 200,000 people today (US population has roughly doubled).

And the medical science in 1968 was ancient compared to today. Yet they lived their lives and didn’t take on trillions in debt.

 

[CappyNU]

At least 100,000 people died and according to another poster nobody blinked an eye during college? That’s the equivalent of 200,000 people today (US population has roughly doubled).

And the medical science in 1968 was ancient compared to today. Yet they lived their lives and didn’t take on trillions in debt.

My guess is the difference is that the 68 flu was probably immediately noticeable and symptoms lasted 4-6 days instead of covid where 20-40% of people never show any symptoms and it's highly contagious before symptoms present.

 

[Fitz51]

I just checked... all football games were played despite a serious flu pandemic that may have killed 4 million globally. (As Northwestern went 1-9, it’s a season most fans probably tried to forget.)

Woodstock even happened during it!

So do any posters recall the Hong Kong flu, and if you lived in constant terror during it? Or did life go on as normal?

(Just a note: this is meant as a serious question. No slash s required.)

Que lastima.

 

[its_the_sauce]

Not downplaying the flu but there were other things going on in 68-69 to distract. How many (including civilians) died in Vietnam during that time?

 

[Fitz51]

How many (including civilians) died in Vietnam during that time?

Of bullets or of the flu? A bullet is just a bad flu!

 

[CatManTrue]

Not downplaying the flu but there were other things going on in 68-69 to distract. How many (including civilians) died in Vietnam during that time?

Over 58,000 US soldiers died during the entirety of Vietnam. The HK flu killed at least twice as many citizens during a much shorter timeframe.

And are you suggesting that there aren’t other major items in the news to distract now? I’d argue there are just as many, if not more.

 

[techtim72]

I was at NU at the time. Cannot say it was that big a story when compared to Vietnam, college demonstrations, race issues and the election. Different time with only a few news sources. Media was not 24/7, not as angry and more balanced. Of course, I was a college freshman and focused on all that entailed, but the campus did not view HK flu as a big risk.

 

[Catslash]

The thing I remember most about the Hong Kong flu are the five days I have no memory of while I had it.

 

[techtim72]

I was at NU at the time. Cannot say it was that big a story when compared to Vietnam, college demonstrations, race issues and the election. Different time with only a few news sources. Media was not 24/7, not as angry and more balanced. Of course, I was a college freshman and focused on all that entailed, but the campus did not view HK flu as a big risk.

Note my comment on race issues. Yes, your grandparents or parents were likely attending demonstrations concerning matters of race during the HK flu similar to today. Out of this came a lot of change and progress. A good thing to remember when making judgements.

 

[villox]

At least 100,000 people died and according to another poster nobody blinked an eye during college? That’s the equivalent of 200,000 people today (US population has roughly doubled).

And the medical science in 1968 was ancient compared to today. Yet they lived their lives and didn’t take on trillions in debt.

You are making the opposite point that you think you’re making. We’re on track for 200,000 dead WITH MASSIVE shutdowns, awareness, social distancing, and trillions of dollars spent. Doesn’t that tell you that this virus is just a wee bit worse than that flu?

 

[FloridAlum]

I was at NU at the time. Cannot say it was that big a story when compared to Vietnam, college demonstrations, race issues and the election. Different time with only a few news sources. Media was not 24/7, not as angry and more balanced. Of course, I was a college freshman and focused on all that entailed, but the campus did not view HK flu as a big risk.

I was in college at the same time and do not recall even hearing about it

 

[WaveJumper]

I was 30 at the time. I do remember hearing about it in the press and also on TV. The Hong Kong flu was not nearly covered as much by the media as Covid 19. I would guess that Covid 19 has more than a hundred times as much coverage as the '68 Hong Kong flu. I also don't remember any controversy on how to treat it. Can't remember, but there was probably a vaccine developed to fight it. There were no lockdowns that I can remember, and no requirement to wear a mask. People pretty much went about their lives as normal, but also were careful when out in public. One BIG difference is that it hit the U.S. after Nixon had won he election, so the politics of the disease and its effect on the U. S. was not in play.

 

[CatManTrue]

You are making the opposite point that you think you’re making. We’re on track for 200,000 dead WITH MASSIVE shutdowns, awareness, social distancing, and trillions of dollars spent. Doesn’t that tell you that this virus is just a wee bit worse than that flu?

I don’t think that I was making a point so much as randomly speculating about what has changed over the past 50 years that a incredibly deadly flu outbreak didn’t seem to impact much of anything back in the late 60s. So far only one poster from that time period has any true recall about it, and he was the only one of “working age” (everyone else appear to has been college-aged).

Some good news: the COVID death rate is projected to fall significantly by year end although the longer-term heart issues are a new concern.

Outside of a few areas we haven’t had massive shutdowns - hence the record-breaking number of cases - and I would argue the trillions have been spent poorly as a result. I’m going to stay away from rant board material as I’m curious to hear more perspectives of people who have lived through both pandemics, and particularly its impact on sports.

 

[CatManTrue]

The thing I remember most about the Hong Kong flu are the five days I have no memory of while I had it.

...wait, so you had it and it caused you to be in a coma for 5 days?

Or you had it and it was so insignificant that you don’t recall it at all?

It’s a bit early for me to effectively read between the lines. Maybe things will be clearer after a few cups of java.

 

[villox]

I don’t think that I was making a point so much as randomly speculating about what has changed over the past 50 years that a incredibly deadly flu outbreak didn’t seem to impact much of anything back in the late 60s. So far only one poster from that time period has any true recall about it, and he was the only one of “working age” (everyone else appear to has been college-aged).

Some good news: the COVID death rate is projected to fall significantly by year end although the longer-term heart issues are a new concern.

Outside of a few areas we haven’t had massive shutdowns - hence the record-breaking number of cases - and I would argue the trillions have been spent poorly as a result. I’m going to stay away from rant board material as I’m curious to hear more perspectives of people who have lived through both pandemics, and particularly its impact on sports.

What changed is that this pandemic is extraordinarily more deadly than that one. No massive shutdowns? All live sports and theater and concerts and public gatherings have been suspended and bars and indoor dining are still shut down in much of the country. 40 million people are out of work. And yet we will STILL get to 200k deaths. And this is with MUCH more modern medical care. I’m shocked you can’t see how much worse this is.

 

[CatManTrue]

I was 30 at the time. I do remember hearing about it in the press and also on TV. The Hong Kong flu was not nearly covered as much by the media as Covid 19. I would guess that Covid 19 has more than a hundred BILLION times as much coverage as the '68 Hong Kong flu.

You left out a word, but I fixed it for you.

What changed is that this pandemic is extraordinarily more deadly than that one. No massive shutdowns? All live sports and theater and concerts and public gatherings have been suspended and bars and indoor dining are still shut down in much of the country. 40 million people are out of work. And yet we will STILL get to 200k deaths. And this is with MUCH more modern medical care. I’m shocked you can’t see how much worse this is.

Up to 4 million people may have died globally from the 1968-1969 H3N2. The strain still lives and can become a concern during flu season. So potentially hundreds of thousands if not millions more have died since.

I’m shocked you so easily dismiss how bad that situation was. If the COVID-19 vaccines are successful, then we might not hit 4 million deaths anytime soon. Again note that the global population has doubled since 1968.

If not for medical advances they had made in the 60s and the timing, it would have been much worse.

To me, a major shutdown would have been *everything* for 6-8 weeks as soon as we knew this would be a major issue. Instead we’ve had this state-by-state hodgepodge which has led to what we currently have.

 

[villox]

You left out a word, but I fixed it for you.

Up to 4 million people may have died globally from the 1968-1969 H3N2. The strain still lives and can become a concern during flu season. So potentially hundreds of thousands if not millions more have died since.

I’m shocked you so easily dismiss how bad that situation was. If the COVID-19 vaccines are successful, then we might not hit 4 million deaths anytime soon. Again note that the global population has doubled since 1968.

If not for medical advances they had made in the 60s and the timing, it would have been much worse.

To me, a major shutdown would have been *everything* for 6-8 weeks as soon as we knew this would be a major issue. Instead we’ve had this state-by-state hodgepodge which has led to what we currently have.

Right, but in some countries that's precisely what happened. The only reason we aren't looking at millions of more deaths is because epidemiology has advanced much further and told us that shutdowns work to prevent death. The fact that we didn't do proper shutdowns should not be considered some sort of success.

And the fact that zero shutdowns happened in the 60s is probably why people didn't consider it such a big deal, no? I have no doubt that media coverage of literally everything means more awareness in the world, but it doesn't mean the media coverage is why this disease is such a big deal when it wasn't in the 60s. This disease is much worse.

 

[CatVideos]

I was 17. I don’t remember it. Truth be told, I often don’t remember my name.

 

[hoosboot]

Haha. Yeah, you're so not trying to make a point that you finish this post that you start with,

I don’t think that I was making a point so much as randomly speculating about what has changed over the past 50 years

by eventually getting around to the point you've been implying in just about every previous post

I would argue the trillions have been spent poorly as a result.

Get that you feel that it's not serious and that we shouldn't have shut things down. Get that you want football and stuff. It would help the conversation if you stopped being disingenuous about what you're saying and just own it.

 

[CatManTrue]

Haha. Yeah, you're so not trying to make a point that you finish this post that you start with,



by eventually getting around to the point you've been implying in just about every previous post



Get that you feel that it's not serious and that we shouldn't have shut things down. Get that you want football and stuff. It would help the conversation if you stopped being disingenuous about what you're saying and just own it.

Well the trillions not being well spent I admit to: it should have been tied to mask mandates. Probably unenforceable but at least people would have an incentive to wear masks if they don’t understand the importance of it. And governors would risk missing out tons of aid if they didn’t enforce it. I should have avoided anything in distance of rant board material.

And I’m fine if there’s no football as posters on the Rock know. So far, quite a few players are willing to opt out and miss out on their paychecks. I don’t want them to play if they don’t feel safe doing so, but right now it looks like enough will want to play to have a season.

I was genuinely curious to hear people’s perspectives on what it was like during the last football season during a pandemic - and it sounds like it wasn’t even a blip.

 

[hoosboot]

Well the trillions not being well spent I admit to: it should have been tied to mask mandates. Probably unenforceable but at least people would have an incentive to wear masks if they don’t understand the importance of it. And governors would risk missing out tons of aid if they didn’t enforce it. I should have avoided anything in distance of rant board material.

And I’m fine if there’s no football as posters on the Rock know. So far, quite a few players are willing to opt out and miss out on their paychecks. I don’t want them to play if they don’t feel safe doing so, but right now it looks like enough will want to play to have a season.

I was genuinely curious to hear people’s perspectives on what it was like during the last football season during a pandemic - and it sounds like it wasn’t even a blip.

I think you're comparing apples to oranges in trying to look at people's awareness about a subject in the late 1960's as opposed to now. It's called The Information Age for a reason and it didn't start in the late 60's. If a Navajo in the 1300's hadn't heard of The Black Death, it doesn't mean that the Bubonic Plague wasn't a big deal.

Football seems like a hard road right now.

 

[Gladeskat]

Well the trillions not being well spent I admit to: it should have been tied to mask mandates. Probably unenforceable but at least people would have an incentive to wear masks if they don’t understand the importance of it. And governors would risk missing out tons of aid if they didn’t enforce it. I should have avoided anything in distance of rant board material.

And I’m fine if there’s no football as posters on the Rock know. So far, quite a few players are willing to opt out and miss out on their paychecks. I don’t want them to play if they don’t feel safe doing so, but right now it looks like enough will want to play to have a season.

I was genuinely curious to hear people’s perspectives on what it was like during the last football season during a pandemic - and it sounds like it wasn’t even a blip.

Is the 1976 Swine Flu pandemic good enough? No special effort was made except to isolate sick players. At least two dozen players came down ill. There was a Trib write up I saw in the NU archives about the opener with Purdue and how hammered both teams were with Swine flu.

 

[Fitz51]

I WANT FOOTBALL! DID THE BLACK PLAGUE STOP FOOTBALL? WILL SOME VAMPIRE ON THESE BOARDS WHO WAS ALIVE THEN TELL ME?

 

[CatManTrue]

I WANT FOOTBALL! DID THE BLACK PLAGUE STOP FOOTBALL? WILL SOME VAMPIRE ON THESE BOARDS WHO WAS ALIVE THEN TELL ME?

Recall, I was planning on “opting out” on this season as a fan if certain changes weren’t made.

I’m fine with or without football as I have plenty to keep me busy. However I still think it will be played.

 

[Fitz51]

Recall, I was planning on “opting out” on this season as a fan if certain changes weren’t made.

I’m fine with or without football as I have plenty to keep me busy. However I still think it will be played.

Yet you asking questions with the fairly transparent angle of "Football should be played" embedded in them.

 

[CatManTrue]

Is the 1976 Swine Flu pandemic good enough? No special effort was made except to isolate sick players. At least two dozen players came down ill. There was a Trib write up I saw in the NU archives about the opener with Purdue and how hammered both teams were with Swine flu.

That counts - any pandemic does in my book. I couldn’t find how many passed but the bigger news there appeared to be issues with the vaccine.

My high school coach played at the same time. He used to joke that they all shared the same ladles from the “team water tub” during their breaks at practice. The shared canker sores were bad enough, but imagine catching the swine flu or coronavirus at the watering hole.

 

[CatManTrue]

Yet you asking questions with the fairly transparent angle of "Football should be played" embedded in them.

I have always been solidly on the side of freedom and liberty.

If our players want to strap on masks, get regularly tested, and play football then I will support them thoroughly and hope none become seriously ill.

If they don’t want to play, I also support them fully. These recent reports on lingering heart issues - even for asymptomatic people - give me great concern.

The players and coaches should be fully informed on all of the risks, and if they decide they don’t want to play for any reason - including out of protest due to social issues - then we should all support them. It’s a free country.

And unfortunately yahoos like the partiers at Rutgers might ruin it for them all:

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...ootball-covid-19-outbreak-linked-campus-party

 

[NorthNJCatsfan]

Not downplaying the flu but there were other things going on in 68-69 to distract. How many (including civilians) died in Vietnam during that time?

This is the key point. Look at a time line for 1968 and note the epochal events that occurred in that year.

 

[Fitz51]

I have always been solidly on the side of freedom and liberty.

Me, too - like the freedom to be able to walk around without the worry of assholes infecting me with a disease whose long-term effects we know nothing about.

If this whole pandemic was only about people getting sick and not those same people also being able to spread it to others, I would be all about letting everyone choose to risk getting sick and dying. But the ability to spread it is what kills everyone's "freedom" argument.

 

[techtim72]

I think you're comparing apples to oranges in trying to look at people's awareness about a subject in the late 1960's as opposed to now. It's called The Information Age for a reason and it didn't start in the late 60's. If a Navajo in the 1300's hadn't heard of The Black Death, it doesn't mean that the Bubonic Plague wasn't a big deal.

Football seems like a hard road right now.

1968 was hardly the dark ages and implying that shows a lack of awareness. If anything, when compared to today, information was more straightforward and focused. Today we have a deluge of information which has become, if anything, more confusing, less focused and frequently intentionally inaccurate. We are now in the era of disinformation.

 

[AtlantaCat]

1968 was hardly the dark ages and implying that shows a lack of awareness. If anything, when compared to today, information was more straightforward and focused. Today we have a deluge of information which has become, if anything, more confusing, less focused and frequently intentionally inaccurate. We are now in the era of disinformation.

Excellent points. I laughed when I read this being "The Information Age". It is the Age of Disinformation. The "information" out there as to this public health crisis has been all over the place, and has in large part been created, published, and selectively repeated, quoted, misquoted, taken out of context, and disseminated to support a particular agenda. Coverage by TV and print media in 1968 was substantially more objective, trustworthy and balanced. Investigative news reporting was not blurred as it is today with providing commentary and delivering sound bites.

 

[Catreporter]

One big difference might be: when you had the flu, you knew it. I don't think asymptomatic carriers were as much of a worry as they are with this thing.