Should the present safety measures for COVID-19 have been used for pandemics such as Swine Flu?

Furthermore, is this how will we should deal with future pandemics?

The 2009 ATS thread about the spread of Swine Flu contains a lot of fascinating and familiar info with hindsight (as well as all the standard 'created in a lab!" CTs etc).

It was a serious pandemic that did not discriminate between ages, with up to 1.4 billion contractions and 575,000 global deaths in its wake. But of course social media was still a comparative infant back then, so the panic was on a much lesser scale, to the point where a lot of people can't remember it. My wife and I caught it in late 2009, but in 2020 we couldn't even remember that we HAD, such was the comparative lack of fuss in 2009-10, and no associated economic meltdown.

How we are dealing with the present virus IS technically and humanely the right thing to do, but was never put into action in 2009/10, most likely because of... well... potential economic meltdown - which itself could lead to substantial deaths via austerity. Was the 2008 financial crash the reason for such different measures?

And now we have an economic meltdown with up to 25 million jobs lost globally, and inevitable further austerity, even though we have yet to recover fully from the 2008 crash.

So should we pursue the same tactics in future? Or is it too early to say so?

I instinctively think Yes, because it's the 'right' thing to do, but it's a very wobbly 'Yes' that doesn't sit there comfortably with a smug look on its face, and probably needs advice from much smarter ATSers than myself. So fire away.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

The huge differences between the h1n1. First, the sitting president at the time was too busy stuffing his pockets and talking nice to his parties masses and having cops killed than to concern himself with the American people. The infection rate of the h1n1 was far slower and hospitals could keep pace whereas the infection rate of coronavirus is far more rapid and is already beginning to challenge resources in localized areas.

originally posted by: tinktinktink
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

The huge differences between the h1n1. First, the sitting president at the time was too busy stuffing his pockets and talking nice to his parties masses and having cops killed than to concern himself with the American people. The infection rate of the h1n1 was far slower and hospitals could keep pace whereas the infection rate of coronavirus is far more rapid and is already beginning to challenge resources in localized areas.

Exactly we have a small town in south Georgia the hospital there used up 5 months of some supplies in 3 days.

a reply to: tinktinktink

Nevermind the fact that in 2009 we were well into a deep recession. I guess that doesn't matter though, let's keep it political.

To the OP: I think we and the world will be better prepared next time, and there will be a next time. I think economic and health systems will become more resilient so, while similar measures may be taken, they won't have as much of an impact.

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
So should we pursue the same tactics in future? Or is it too early to say so?

I think a more measured response would be prudent before the Internet gets a hold of it and panics everyone by trying to get clicks with horror stories (which is what it's famous for).

I like the idea of working harder to identify the true scope of the illness first and then quarantine the people who are actually sick, rather than everybody in the whole world.

In the same fashion North Korea or Iran should not have nukes, and we make sure... China's ability to handle bio-weapons should be TORN from their hands and watched over by ''global sanctioning bodies".

Inexcusable mistake. Inexcusable response.

H1N1 - h1n1 wiki page

The final estimate was of over 12,000 deaths over the course of the pandemic (April 2009 - April 2010).

Comparing Apples to candybars... This Bad Mamajama has MUTATED!!!! there is 2 variations of this thing now, one that doesnt harm kids an one that DOES!!!!!!

CORVID19

In China ALONE, their death total from coronavirus is - 3,123 - out of 80,880 infected
Italy - 1,809 have died so far - out of 24,747 infected
Iran 853 out of 14,991

So just 3 countries with early data thats 5,785 deaths from corvid19, is almost half the total number of deaths from h1n1
globally!

So, it's safe to say that, this is a much more serious issue, which those facts alone, lead to concern and speculation.

The reason we didn't react the same way, is

a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined

Facts are hard:

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, there were 60.8 million cases, 274,00 hospitalizations, and 12,469 deaths (0.02% case fatality rate) in the United States due to the virus.[117]
Contents

a reply to: Nodrak

Yeap, dem facts be in dem links, hard to miss...

2nd line of love

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
H1N1 - h1n1 wiki page

The final estimate was of over 12,000 deaths over the course of the pandemic (April 2009 - April 2010).

Comparing Apples to candybars... This Bad Mamajama has MUTATED!!!! there is 2 variations of this thing now, one that doesnt harm kids an one that DOES!!!!!!

CORVID19

In China ALONE, their death total from coronavirus is - 3,123 - out of 80,880 infected
Italy - 1,809 have died so far - out of 24,747 infected
Iran 853 out of 14,991

So just 3 countries with early data thats 5,785 deaths from corvid19, is almost half the total number of deaths from h1n1
globally!

So, it's safe to say that, this is a much more serious issue, which those facts alone, lead to concern and speculation.

The reason we didn't react the same way, is

Careful, the 12,000 figure is just the USA, the global figures were estimated at 284,000 or normally quoted at 150-575k. But I don't like using estimates, the actual recorded figures were 3,433 in the USA and just under 20,000 world wide.

en.wikipedia.org...