[Goose]

The 1918 Flu pandemic spread quickly enough, and back then they traveled by boat to Europe and by railroad from one part of the US to another.



Yes, increased world travel has reduced the time to react from months to weeks, but the extent of the pandemic isn't due to the availability of jet travel.



BC

I still believe that the rapid and heavily used jet travel is in fact the driving force for the extent of this epidemic. How many people traveled from Wuhan to the USA in 1960? How many people from Wuhan would even consider traveling to Germany for a 3 day meeting in 1960? The answers are almost none and none. It isn't just that the delay from outbreak in China to COVID-19 positive people arriving in the USA was greatly reduced. That is bad enough, and cuts the reaction time way down. Worse still are two other factors.

First, the number of positive people arriving in the USA was much, much larger than would have been the case before jet travel became available, relatively cheap, and heavily relied upon in daily life. In point of fact, about twice as many people visit the the USA each month as were in the entire AEF in WW I. This does not include Americans returning home from travel. There is no way to manage such an influx to exclude positive people. The resulting influx creates an "instant epidemic". Just like hospital ICUs, epidemic response teams can be overwhelmed by sheer numbers. In the past, we had  exponential spread from a few patients. A small tracking and tracing organization could cope. When you have a flood of people burrowing into the population that is positive for COVID-19, there is no chance to contain it and many cases of exponential spread are inevitable.  Thus the extent in the USA. SIP becomes the only possible response.

Second, the "direction" from which the epidemic arrives is no longer predictable. The bad situation in New York/New Jersey was generated not by visitors from China, but rather people returning from Europe. In the past, the public health people could ask "Were you in China on this trip?" If you said no, they let you through, knowing you were probably not positive. However, many people got exposed in other nations at a time when those nations were not real hotbeds of disease. This is possible because easy travel allows people from anywhere to mix with people from anywhere, not just with "natives" of a given destination. International conferences are common today. Perfect spreading events. Before easy, fast jet travel such events were rare.

So yes, I think the travel climate made things much, much worse than they would have been in "the past". Not that I am trying to advocate going back in time. Rather, I am advocating recognizing that it is a new ball game and reacting accordingly.

[Goose]

The 1918 Flu pandemic spread quickly enough, and back then they traveled by boat to Europe and by railroad from one part of the US to another.



Yes, increased world travel has reduced the time to react from months to weeks, but the extent of the pandemic isn't due to the availability of jet travel.



BC

I still believe that the rapid and heavily used jet travel is in fact the driving force for the extent of this epidemic. How many people traveled from Wuhan to the USA in 1960? How many people from Wuhan would even consider traveling to Germany for a 3 day meeting in 1960? The answers are almost none and none. It isn't just that the delay from outbreak in China to COVID-19 positive people arriving in the USA was greatly reduced. That is bad enough, and cuts the reaction time way down. Worse still are two other factors.

First, the number of positive people arriving in the USA was much, much larger than would have been the case before jet travel became available, relatively cheap, and heavily relied upon in daily life. In point of fact, about twice as many people visit the the USA each month as were in the entire AEF in WW I. This does not include Americans returning home from travel. There is no way to manage such an influx to exclude positive people. The resulting influx creates an "instant epidemic". Just like hospital ICUs, epidemic response teams can be overwhelmed by sheer numbers. In the past, we had  exponential spread from a few patients. A small tracking and tracing organization could cope. When you have a flood of people burrowing into the population that is positive for COVID-19, there is no chance to contain it and many cases of exponential spread are inevitable.  Thus the extent in the USA. SIP becomes the only possible response.

Second, the "direction" from which the epidemic arrives is no longer predictable. The bad situation in New York/New Jersey was generated not by visitors from China, but rather people returning from Europe. In the past, the public health people could ask "Were you in China on this trip?" If you said no, they let you through, knowing you were probably not positive. However, many people got exposed in other nations at a time when those nations were not real hotbeds of disease. This is possible because easy travel allows people from anywhere to mix with people from anywhere, not just with "natives" of a given destination. International conferences are common today. Perfect spreading events. Before easy, fast jet travel such events were rare.

So yes, I think the travel climate made things much, much worse than they would have been in "the past". Not that I am trying to advocate going back in time. Rather, I am advocating recognizing that it is a new ball game and reacting accordingly.