As a parallel, the Spanish Flu, which was much worse than this, had a much smaller economic impact than the world war which immediately preceded it. There was no worldwide economic collapse or mass unemployment.
04-02-2020 08:14 AM
#1
| |
As a parallel, the Spanish Flu, which was much worse than this, had a much smaller economic impact than the world war which immediately preceded it. There was no worldwide economic collapse or mass unemployment. | |
04-02-2020 09:35 AM
#2
| |
That's largely because that time we didn't know how to fight it and we didn't shut down the economy by lockdowns. Also the economy probably worked a bit differently back then too, with less speculative stock market actions causing companies to lose equity and be forced by shareholders to lay off people, for example. | |
| |
04-02-2020 09:47 AM
#3
| |
Yeah I mean it's not really a good comparison. There were two peaks of fatalities from SF around age 18 and age 45. So these, coupled with the WW, contributed to a huge labour shortage that hurt the economy in a different way. | |
04-02-2020 09:57 AM
#4
| |
Regarding immunity, your respiratory system, just like the rest of your body, is constantly housing different viruses, including rhinoviruses and corona-type viruses. We only get sick when conditions allow these to multiply out of control. It's perfectly possible to get low-grade CV-19, for example, and not be sick. So getting your rest, exercising, eating healthy foods, etc.., is a good way to protect yourself if you do get exposed (which of course you should try to avoid as much as possible). | |
04-02-2020 10:00 AM
#5
| |
Not-so-fun fact: My great-grandfather died of SF in 1918. He was a farmer in his early 40s and healthy at the time he caught it. | |