Chadeaux
Gold Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,512
- Reaction score
- 6,409
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Southeast Arkansas
- Detector(s) used
- Ace 250
- Primary Interest:
- Cache Hunting
- #1
Thread Owner
Here's A Fix From 1918 ... More Invasive Than 21 Day Quarantine, but worked
Bit of history of containment of pandemic of 1918 (Spanish Influenza)
What about Washington DC?
Hmm... a bit of polyticking there at the end.
Truth is, and I got it first hand from someone who lived through it, the quarantine is what stopped the influenza. Health studies in High School also bore this out and affirmed what my dad's step mother had told me. Without quarantine being used to the extent it was, the pandemic would have continued and grew.
Bit of history of containment of pandemic of 1918 (Spanish Influenza)
Some towns closed places of public entertainment to stop the spread of the virus from person to person contact. The Pennsylvania Health Commissioner, Dr. B.F. Royer, issued a statewide ban closing theaters, saloons, schools, churches, and public meetinghouses. The move was a smart attempt to control the disease within the small town population. Because the influenza outbreak was highly contagious and easily spread by coughs, it was a good idea to keep the population of the town from congregating in large groups to prevent the spread of the outbreak around the town. Although the rights of the individuals were somewhat infringed upon in order to protect the community, the measure seems to be an appropriate response in order to sustain the disease from spreading too much within one subset of the population. The difference between this ban and the quarantine of an entire group of people is that the bans prevented large groups of people from congregating and spreading the disease within themselves, while the quarantine did not provide for that kind of protection, but attempted to keep one population from spreading the disease to the other groups of people. The ban situation is an infringement of rights, but a smaller infringement to a better end than the quarantine. The ban is therefore more socially just than the quarantine.
What about Washington DC?
Washington D.C. enacted a law that made it illegal to appear out of doors and out of one's home. The quarantine infringed upon the personal rights of the townspeople to attempt to benefit the greater population. Again, if the outbreak had been small and easily contained, the quarantine may have been necessary and effective, but attempts to stop the greater outbreak and spread of influenza by quarantine were not necessarily useful.
Hmm... a bit of polyticking there at the end.
Truth is, and I got it first hand from someone who lived through it, the quarantine is what stopped the influenza. Health studies in High School also bore this out and affirmed what my dad's step mother had told me. Without quarantine being used to the extent it was, the pandemic would have continued and grew.