@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
right no its moor of a statistical thing. As I read farther , before the Spanih flu" disappeared" , it had widened its target bases and became less lethal. Without knowing Id guess that some fact in natural selection was at work (Isolation was practiced later and most of the first victims were the young who coul have rturnd from war and were more freely associating).
Not a clue, but Ill bet some degree of mutations had been at work. They are now only excavating graves to cross sample some available virus by PCR. (The technology has become rather more spcific and sensitive in the last 5 or so yrs)
It sounds like more cases were recorded from a larger sampling population that included more people who wouldn't normally report the flu because they would just get through it.
Do you know if the overall death rate correlated with the rise in non-lethal cases?
I would think any pandemic would have an initial mortality curve that grows quickly as many health-vulnerable people contract the disease and die from it, but then there is also a lot of people who are vulnerable but protected by social isolation/distancing, who get infected and die later because many people become carriers/vectors for the disease who don't social-distance as rigorously because they don't really care that much about people besides themselves.