What Happened in Philadelphia and Baltimore That Led to the Spread of Influenza in 1918?

The 1918 Influenza Pandemic: Insights for the 21st Century

David M. Morens,

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Wellness

Bethesda, Maryland

Reprints or correspondence: Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 31 Middle Dr., Bldg. 31, Rm. 7A-03 MSC 2520, Bethesda, MD 20892-2520 (AFAUCI@niaid.nih.gov); or Dr. David Thou. Morens, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 6610 Rockledge Dr., Rm. 4097, Bethesda, Dr. 20892-6603(dm270q@niaid.nih.gov).

Search for other works by this writer on:

Abstruse

The 1918–1919 H1N1 influenza pandemic was amidst the most mortiferous events in recorded human history, killing an estimated l–100 million persons. Because recent H5N1 avian epizootics take been associated with desultory man fatalities, concern has been raised that a new pandemic, as fatal as the pandemic of 1918, or more so, could exist developing. Understanding the events and experiences of 1918 is thus of great importance. Nonetheless, despite the genetic sequencing of the entire genome of the 1918 virus, many questions nigh the 1918 pandemic remain. In this review we accost several of these questions, concerning pandemic-virus origin, unusual epidemiologic features, and the causes and demographic patterns of fatality. That none of these questions can nevertheless be fully answered points to the demand for continued pandemic vigilance, basic and applied research, and pandemic preparedness planning that emphasizes prevention, containment, and treatment with antiviral medications and hospital-based intensive care.

The spread of H5N1 avian influenza viruses from Asia to the Middle E, Europe, and Africa has heightened international alarm that an influenza pandemic may be imminent [one]. The Earth Health Arrangement [2] and many individual nations, including the U.s.a. [3], take developed plans to detect the emergence of pandemic influenza and to limit its effects. Because no flu pandemic has appeared since 1967–1968, such plans rely on consideration of this and earlier pandemics. Of these, the 1918–1919 "Spanish flu" pandemic was among the deadliest public-wellness crises in man history, killing an estimated 675,000 people in the Usa and an estimated 50–100 million people worldwide [4]. This pandemic's explosive and withal-unexplained patterns of rapidly recurrent waves and predilection to kill the immature and healthy [v–7] bandage an element of urgency over pandemic planning today.

Defective consummate explanations for the genesis and epidemiologic beliefs of the 1918–1919 pandemic [8], Taubenberger and colleagues recently took a disquisitional pace past sequencing the unabridged eight-segment genome of the 1918 flu virus, using RNA fragments recovered from the lungs of several victims [9, 10]. This scientific accomplishment has spurred many important avenues of research, including advances such as the discovery that the 1918 virus obviously arose not by gene reassortment between a human and animal virus merely by genome accommodation, a previously undocumented mechanism of pandemicvirus generation. Despite these insights, many key questions remain. In this article, nosotros discuss several bug that have implications for modern pandemic preparedness (table 1).

Table i.

Important questions posed by the 1918 influenza pandemic.

Origin of the 1918 Pandemic Influenza Virus

The 1918–1919 flu pandemic was caused past an influenza A virus of the H1N1 subtype. Sequence assay suggests that the ultimate bequeathed source of this virus is almost certainly avian [10, 11]. This is not an unexpected finding: the enteric tracts of waterfowl such every bit ducks and geese serve every bit reservoirs for all known influenza A viruses [ane, 11]. Waterfowl typically experience asymptomatic infection and exert little selection force per unit area on viral evolution. To jump to new hosts such as chickens or mammals and infect very different cell types, such every bit homo lung cells, rather than duck enteric cells, an influenza virus may have to adapt past accumulating one or more point mutations or by reassortment with a gene segment from a different flu virus [eight, 12]. A third possible genetic mechanism, homologous recombination between gene segments of different viruses, has non yet been shown to be of importance for the evolution of human influenza viruses.

Information technology is unclear which host served as the source of the 1918 virus—and how the virus adapted to humans. Test of the genome of the 1918 H1N1 influenza virus [nine, x] has non provided complete answers; indeed, it has posed difficult new questions. Although all 8 gene segments of the 1918 virus are conspicuously avian-like, they are genetically singled-out from any of the hundreds of avian or mammalian flu viruses collected and examined betwixt 1917 and 2006, primarily because of greater-than-expected numbers of silent nucleotide changes. Moreover, the genes of the 1918 virus plainly have evolved together in parallel, possibly in an unidentified host [8]. Thus, unlike the 1957 and 1968 pandemics, each of which resulted from reassortment betwixt circulating descendants of the 1918 human virus and circulating avian flu strains, the 1918 pandemic patently arose by genetic accommodation of an existing avian virus to a new (human) host [8, 10–12].

The obscurity of the viral origin of the 1918 influenza poses a paradox. The lower-than-expected mortality among individuals who were >45 years old in 1918 (i.e., those built-in earlier 1873; come across the discussion below) implies partial protection from disease and possibly infection [5–seven]. I possible caption is previous exposure to an antigenically related virus that had circulated widely. Even so, evidence for such a virus is incomplete.

Further complicating the effect is the fact that at least two different H1N1 influenza-virus strains that had markedly different receptor-binding specificities and that were fatal to humans were circulating simultaneously in 1918 [13]. Ane strain independent variations in both the 190 and 225 codons (mutations E190D and D225G, respectively) of the H1 gene. These changes enable the hemagglutinin (HA) poly peptide of the virus to bind only to a(2–6) sialic-acid receptors found on human being/mammalian cells. The second circulating strain contained only the E190D change, rendering it capable of binding to both mammalian α(2–vi) receptors and avian α(2–three) sialicacid receptors [14, 15]. Although the 1918 virus appears to be descended from an avian virus, earlier the 1918 pandemic there were few if any reports of unusual die-offs of wild waterfowl or domestic poultry, as has occurred with the modernistic H5N1 virus, indicating that the earlier virus was not and then highly pathogenic for birds. The H1N1 and H5N1 viruses thus seem to have gone down different evolutionary paths. Taken together, the information noted above is consistent with the possibility that the precursor to the 1918 virus was subconscious in an obscure ecologic niche earlier emerging in humans.

Pathogenesis and Excess Mortality in 1918–1919

In healthy children and adults, influenza is usually an simple febrile illness that may incapacitate simply rarely kills [16]. Many typical seasonal influenza infections are asymptomatic or cause but balmy or vague symptoms. Others cause "classical" flu: four or 5 days of fever, chills, headache, muscle hurting, weakness, and, sometimes, upper-respiratory-tract symptoms and cough. Severe complications and deaths can occur, peculiarly in infants, the elderly, and individuals with chronic conditions such as diabetes mellitus and heart disease. Among the most severe complications is pneumonia, which can be associated with secondary bacterial infection.

The first widely studied influenza pandemic occurred during 1889–1893 [17, xviii]. To older physicians in 1918, obvious similarities to the 1889 pandemic included its highly contagious nature, with clinical set on rates typically in the xx%–60% range. In both pandemics, almost deaths resulted from respiratory complications, such every bit pneumonia with bacterial invasion; however, in 1918 there also were seemingly new and severe clinical forms of disease. In 1889 many deaths due to pneumonia were attributed to familiar conditions such as subacute bacterial lobar pneumonia, whereas in 1918 this "groundwork" influenza bloodshed was profoundly augmented both by cases of ambitious fatal bronchopneumonia and by acute deaths associated with progressive cyanosis and collapse (effigy 1).

Figure 1.

Histological appearance of lung sections from iii fatal cases of influenza during 1918, showing distinct clinical-pathologic forms. A, Severe and rapidly progressing necrotizing/hemorrhagic bronchopneumonia, which is consistent with cytolytic viral damage and secondary bacterial invasion by respiratory-tract pathogens and which is associated with some (probably a minority of) deaths. B, Astringent bacterial bronchopneumonia from which Streptococcus pneumoniae, S. pyogenes, Haemophilus influenzae, or, less frequently, Staphylococcus aureus could be cultured and which is associated with the bulk of deaths. The extent to which secondary bacterial pneumonia may have followed master necrotizing viral pneumonia is unclear, considering early on signs of viral cytolytic damage had typically been obliterated by the time of dissection. C, Some other clinical form of disease, which, although information technology had not been characterized when the culture was performed, is thought to be similar to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [42] and appears to have been associated with a minority of fatal cases. Patients with this class experienced extremely rapid progression of the disease and may have literally drowned because of fluid-filled alveoli, often in the absence of bacteria or inflammatory infiltrate. Varying degrees of the same pathologic features seen in this ARDS-like form were also seen in many or well-nigh patients with the severe cytolytic form (see panel A). (Photographs courtesy of Jeffery Grand. Taubenberger, National Constitute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.)

Dissimilar the 1889–1893 pandemic, which made 3 or more successive annual and largely seasonal reappearances, the 1918 pandemic spread in iii apace recurring waves inside an ∼9-month interval (effigy 2A), before settling into a pattern of almanac seasonal recurrences. Moreover,bloodshed during the latter ii of the three 1918–1919 waves was much higher, at all ages except amidst the elderly, than that during 1889, and it featured an enormous mortality summit in healthy young adults (figure 2B), an age group believed to have been at low adventure of death in all other pandemics upward to that fourth dimension. For purposes of comparison, the 1957 and 1968 influenza pandemics, both caused by descendants of the 1918 virus, produced relatively low mortality overall, did not produce rapidly successive waves or multiple annual recurrences of loftier mortality, and settled more quickly into familiar patterns of annual seasonal endemic circulation [nineteen–21].

Figure 2.

A, Monthly influenza-associated bloodshed in Breslau, Silesia (now Wroclaw, Poland), from June 1918 through Dec 1922. On this graph, reproduced on the ground of information reported by Lubinski [44], we take superimposed indications of the 3 waves (W1, W2, and W3) of the 1918–1919 pandemic, also as the first 3 annual winter postpandemic recurrences during 1919–1920 (R1), 1920–1921 (R2), and 1921–1922 (R3). During 1918–1919, many locales experienced these 3 waves. B, Age-specific influenza-associated mortality in Breslau, from July 1918 to April 1922. The unbroken line combines influenza-associated mortality during waves W2 and W3 of the 1918–1919 pandemic; the dashed line denotes influenza associated mortality during the start winter recurrence, from January to April 1920 (R1); the dotted line denotes influenza-associated mortality during the R3 wintertime recurrence, from December 1921 to Apr 1922. The elevation young-developed bloodshed, documented worldwide, is axiomatic in the W2+W3 and R1 curves of 1919–1921 but has completely disappeared by 1922.

Clinical and autopsy serial [22–33] suggest that excess flu deaths (i.e., deaths above the expected background level for influenza) during 1918–1919 seem to have been associated with 2 overlapping clinical-pathologic syndromes (figure i). The virtually common appears to take been an acute aggressive bronchopneumonia featuring epithelial necrosis, microvasculitis/vascular necrosis, hemorrhage, edema, and widely variant pathology in different parts of the lung, from which pathogenic bacteria could usually be cultured at dissection (figure 1; too see [28]). In a few autopsies, severe bronchopneumonia was seen without evidence of bacteria, only studies generally showed a shut correlation between the distributions of pulmonary lesions and cultured bacteria [34, 35], identifying the major leaner equally the organisms now known every bit Streptococcus pneumoniae, Due south. pyogenes, and, less normally, Haemophilus influenzae and Staphylococcus aureus [22, 36–xl]. Scientists have long suspected that the pathogenesis of the 1918 virus was augmented by concomitant infection with the virus and with leaner such as South. pneumoniae and Southward. pyogenes [41].

The second syndrome, comprising perhaps ten%–15% of fatal cases, was a severe-astute respiratory distress—similar syndrome (ARDS) [42] in which patients developed a peculiar "heliotrope cyanosis" characterized by blue-gray facial discoloration and essentially drowned from "huge [amounts of] ... thin and watery encarmine exudates in the lung tissue and bronchioles" [24, p. 650]. There are few if any representative data to document these percentages exactly, and there are marked differences between various published series and between armed services and civilian populations. Nor is it sure that deaths due to either the ARDS-like syndrome or bronchopneumonias lacking massive bacterial invasion represented primary viral pneumonias. Although these 2 pathologic pictures may not be unique to the 1918 pandemic [43], they conspicuously occurred with significantly greater frequency than they had during other known influenza pandemics. Information technology seems reasonable to propose that in the 1918 pandemic many excess deaths resulted from a disease procedure that began with a severe astute viral infection that spread down the respiratory tree, causing astringent tissue damage that often was followed by secondary bacterial invasion. More-definitive answers regarding affliction pathogenesis may be fostered by a comprehensive reexamination of 1918 autopsy series.

Excess Deaths Among the Young and Healthy

2 unique epidemiologic features account for almost excess mortality in 1918–1919: a high case-fatality rate at all ages, and a surprising excess of mortalityamong 20–xl-twelvemonth-quondam individuals, an age grouping at comparatively low risk for flu mortality in pandemics before and since. Curves of flu mortality by historic period at decease are typically U-shaped, reflecting high mortality in the very young and the very old, with low bloodshed at all ages between [viii]; in dissimilarity, the 1918–1919 pandemic and succeeding winter epidemic recurrences in 1919 and 1920 [44] produced Due west-shaped mortality curves, which featured a third mortality meridian, in healthy young adults, which was responsible for approximately half of the full influenza deaths, including the majority of excess influenza deaths [8] (figure 2B).

Explaining the extraordinary excess influenza bloodshed in persons twenty–40 years of age in 1918 is perhaps the most important unsolved mystery of the pandemic. These young adults were part of an historic period accomplice built-in during 1878–1898; evidence suggests that, during that twenty-year time span, there was wide circulation simply of an H3 influenza virus [45], which appeared every bit a pandemic in 1889, in the eye of the birth-take chances interval.

Host and ecology variables accept not been systematically investigated every bit possible causes of increased mortality in the immature and healthy. It is possible that vigorous immune responses directed against the virus in healthy young persons could accept caused severe disease in 1918; for example, an unusually brisk and paradoxically pathogenic antiviral allowed response has been observed when patients with AIDS respond to treatment with antiretroviral drugs; return of immune function leads to severe inflammatory responses to viruses and microorganisms infecting the patients (the allowed-reconstitution inflammatory syndrome [46]). Some other viral cause of severe ARDS—hantavirus pulmonary syndrome [47], especially in association with the Due north American Sin Nombre virus—features an unexplained preponderance of cases in young adults, a preponderance that appears not to be due solely to higher rates of exposure among this age group [48, 49]. It is conceivable that aberrant inflammatory responses play a office in this state of affairs.

The notion that a so-chosen cytokine storm, a deleterious overexuberant release of proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-6 and -8 and tissue necrosis factor—α, could have contributed to the high mortality and excessive number of deaths amid the young and otherwise healthy during the 1918 pandemic has been oft proposed [50, 51]. This theory is bolstered by recent observations of fatal cases of H5N1 infection in humans [52], experimental studies of H5N1 in macrophages [53], and other data on immunopathogenesis [54, 55], which suggests that homo infection with influenza viruses, including the 1918 virus [56, 57], tin result in excessive release of cytokines. Experimental fauna studies of reconstructed 1918 influenza-virus infection take also shown up-regulation of acute inflammatory cytokines [56–59]; for case, intranasal claiming of mice with the reconstituted 1918 virus led to a highly lethal and rapidly progressing pulmonary disease characterized by high viral growth, a histological picture of necrotizing bronchitis/bronchiolitis, alveolitis, alveolar hemorrhage and edema, and overexpression of acute inflammatory cytokines [58]. Comparing of pathologic findings during 1918–1919, cases of fatal human H5N1 infections [52], and 2 unrelated viral pulmonary diseases—namely, astringent acute respiratory symdrome [60, 61] and severe hantavirus pulmonary syndrome [47, 62]—thought to be associated with cytokine storms suggests that, although they differ in pathologic features, ARDS may be a common finish betoken. Even so, it must also exist remembered that in 1918 many or almost severe cases of influenza-related pulmonary illness featured both astringent bronchopulmonary tissue damage and severe secondary bacterial infection [viii].

Immunopathogenesis may besides differ between diverse age groups because people of different ages have been exposed to unlike viruses at unlike times and considering response to a new virus may depend on the history of previous exposures. In this regard, antibody-dependent enhancement of infection, which has been suspected as a cause of dengue hemorrhagic fever in association with second dengue infections, has been demonstrated in vitro with influenza viruses [63]. Alternatively, the West-shaped mortality pattern could be consistent with an environmental exposure peculiar to young adults (e.grand., smoking or aspirin apply); notwithstanding, information examining this possibility have not been reported, and thus the 1918 W-shaped mortality curve and the extremely high mortality in young adults remain to be fully explained.

Lower-Than-Expected Mortality Amid the Elderly

Although both mortality and the instance-fatality charge per unit in 1918–1919 were college, at all ages, than would be expected on the ground of prior (and subsequent) pandemics/epidemics, and although the expected pattern of markedly increased mortality with advancing age was conspicuously present, it is noteworthy that, although increased,mortality in the elderly was less pronounced than that in the other age groups (figure iii). It has been speculated that this might be due to previous exposure to an antigenically related flu virus [64–66]. All the same, other than regional outbreaks [67, 68] and an 1872 American epizootic of equine influenza, which was associated with but mild human illnesses [69, lxx], there is petty evidence for major interpandemic influenza events during the menses before 1889 [71]. Moreover, none of the 3 pandemics during the century before 1918 (in 1830, 1847, and 1889) are thought to have been associated with multiple, rapidly successive waves; Westward-shaped bloodshed curves; a predominance of aggressive bronchopneumonias; or marked hemorrhagic features characteristic of the 1918 pandemic [eight, 17, eighteen, 72–79]. The 1889 pandemic, which occurred likewise closely in time to have offered protection only for older individuals in 1918, appears to have been caused by an H3 influenza virus [45]. The possibility of immunoprotection mediated by neuraminidase (NA), rather than by HA, during 1918 is intriguing [fourscore], but in that location are few data bearing on this possibility: the identity of the 1889 NA is not known with certainty, although serologic data from 2 independent sources are consequent with an N8 virus appearing in approximately 1889 and circulating until some time before 1918 [81, 82], suggesting that the 1889 pandemic virus could have been of H3N8 identity. The 1847 pandemic might explain 1918 H1N1 protection in individuals >70 years old, but just if information technology was caused past an H1 or, less likely, N1 virus that was closely related antigenically but much less pathogenic.

Effigy 3.

Influenza-associated mortality in New South Wales, Australia, during the 1891 and 1919 influenza pandemics [65]. The severe waves of the 1918–1919 pandemic in Commonwealth of australia were delayed until (the Southern Hemisphere) wintertime of 1919. Because population data by age in 1891 were not bachelor, and considering the mortality in males was similar to that in females, the 1891 data are based on published male/female person mortality-rate ways. In all age groups except persons 165 years old, the mortality per 1000 persons per age group during 1919 (●—●) were higher than those during 1891 (○ — ○), and the age-specific mortality curve was W-shaped, featuring a middle peak of mortality in immature adults.

The 3 Pandemic Waves in 1918–1919: Implications for Predicting Future Pandemic Patterns

Agreement patterns of pandemic spread is important in planning prevention strategies and anticipating publichealth and medical burdens. Dissimilar all previous and subsequent pandemics, the 1918–1919 pandemic seems to have spread in at least 3 distinct waves inside an ∼9-month interval. Not all influenza pandemics accept had such prominent recurrences, and those that did have tended to return at yearly intervals (due east.g., 1889–1893), making them difficult to distinguish, in kind if non in impact, from normal seasonal flu [viii, 83]. Globally, the start wave of the 1918 pandemic, W1, occurred during spring-summer 1918 (equally recognized in the Northern Hemisphere) and was associated with high morbidity but low mortality. The 2 following waves, in summerfall 1918 (W2) and winter 1918–1919 (W3), were both deadly [vii, 44] (effigy 2).

It is difficult to make epidemiologic sense of this pattern. If some combination of rising population immunity and unfavorable seasonality had reduced W1 circulation during the spring of 1918, it is hard to explicate how W2 could accept begun most immediately thereafter—and in thesummer, normally the least favorable time for influenza-virus apportionment. Also, it is hard to explain why, at to the lowest degree in some locales, the early-summer end of W1 was largely complimentary of bloodshed whereas the latesummer/early-fall onset of W2, appearing so shortly thereafter, was associated with extraordinarily high mortality.

The question arises whether different influenza viruses caused the different waves. In this regard, all of the viruses so far identified by the Taubenberger laboratory are from W2 [8]. It would be useful to know whether illness during W1 protected confronting affliction during W2 and W3, which would imply viral antigenic similarity or identity. Nevertheless, there are few good data addressing this upshot, and those which be are both imperfect and contradictory [84]. Although the near reliable data demonstrate W2 protection against W3, they also suggest that W1 protection against W2 or W3 illness was minimal at all-time [85]. It is also possible that mutation of the pandemic virus, leading to greater pathogenicity, was occurring during mid-1918; however, this possibility does not in itself explain generation of apparently low protective immunity after loftier assault ratesin W1. The implication that ii H1N1 phenotypes were circulating during the fall wave (W2), discussed above, also remains to be explained, given (1) that W2 did appear to protect against illness in W3 and (2) that, after several years had passed, influenza bloodshed declined to baseline levels, a finding consistent with powerful population immunity and emergence of less pathogenic viruses. Thus, the 3 waves of the 1918–1919 pandemic remain unexplained, and in that location is, thus far, lilliputian footing for predicting the recurrence pattern of the side by side pandemic.

Predicting Influenza Pandemics

The occurrences of 3 influenza pandemics during the 19th century and of another 3 during the 20th century [1] have led some experts to conclude that pandemics occur in cycles and that nosotros are now overdue. Belief in influenza cyclicity tin can be traced to epidemiologic efforts during the mid 19th century; later the 1889–1893 pandemic, involvement in examining the patterns of influenza recurrence was renewed [86]. Past the 1950s, cumulative historical information [5–7, 67, 68, 72–79] seemed to advise that pandemics appear in regular cycles. This seemed to make biological sense: the most contempo pandemics (in 1889, 1918, and 1957) had plain been caused by different viruses with novel HA genes imported from a large, naturally existing avian pool. At approximately the same time, information technology was becoming clear that high levels of population immunity pressured postpandemic viruses to drift antigenically and that surface protein–encoding genes could potentially mix with other HA and NA genes to which humans lacked immunity [87]. It was reasonable to assume that such an intimate viral-immunologic relationship would take a predictable life bridge.

Around the time of the 1957 and 1968 pandemics, the prevailing view was that pandemics tended to recur as frequently as every 10–11 years; still, in 1976 a fatal H1N1 "swine flu" outbreak raised considerable alert without causing a predicted pandemic [88], and, a yr later, later on 20 years of natural "extinction," an H1N1 descendant of the 1918 virus all of a sudden reemerged to reestablish postpandemic cocirculation with one of its own further descendants, the H3N2 influenza virus [89], setting upwardly nigh iii decades of endemic cocirculation of former pandemic viruses that has continued until today (2006).

Fading belief in pandemic cycles has been acknowledged past influenza authorities. For decades, noted flu expert Edwin Kilbourne, Sr., articulated both the widely held conviction about pandemic cyclicity and its scientific rationale. Examination of more-recent evidence, however, leads Kilbourne to conclude that "there is no predictable periodicity or design" of major influenza epidemics and that "all differ from 1 another" [90, p. 9]; without pandemic cycles in that location can be niggling basis for predicting pandemic emergence.

Information technology has become clear that pandemic emergence tin can issue from at least 2 very unlike mechanisms: de novo emergence of a completely unique avian-descended virus (equally in 1918) or modification of a circulating human being-adapted virus past importation, via genetic reassortment, of a novel HA, either with concomitant importation of a novel NA (eastward.g., the 1957 H2N2 pandemic) or without such concomitant importation (eastward.yard., the 1968 H3N2 pandemic) [8]. There is no reason to suppose that these 2 different pandemic mechanisms should be capable of producing the same circadian intervals—or that other, competing adaptational mechanisms, such as reassortment with closely related HAs [91] or irresolute population amnesty induced past increasing utilise of immunologically complex vaccines, could not disrupt cycles that might otherwise occur. It has likewise become clear that, despite a big catalog of naturally occurring influenza surface-protein genes theoretically capable of causing new pandemics by reassorting themselves into homo-adapted strains, merely 3 of 16 known HAs (i.e., H1, H2, and H3) and 2 of 9 known NAs (i.east., N1 and N2) are known to accept done so during the by 117 years [87, 92].

Drawing on the earlier theories proposed past Thomas Francis, Jr. [93], and others, Maurice Hilleman attempted to reconcile these complications by proposing a course of "macrocyclicity" in which reappearances of H1, H2, and H3 (approximately every 68 years) are driven by cycles of waning population immunity that have approximately the same duration every bit does the mean human life bridge [87]. Because scientific show of viral identity extends backward for only 117 years, it will take many future generations to fully test Hilleman's hypothesis.

Historical prove of pandemic occurrences provides no obvious circadian patterns during the by 3 centuries [67, 68, 72–79, 94–97] (figure 4). Presumably, mutable viruses producing high population amnesty will eventually bulldoze their own evolutionary changes; notwithstanding, if pandemic cycles practise occur, they must be so irregular as to confound predictibility.

Effigy 4.

Influenza pandemic occurrence, 1600–2000. Information was compiled from historical references [67, 68, 72–79, 94–97] and from scientific publications from 1889 to the present (non cited). Interpandemic intervals are noted at the top of the graph. Pandemics are associated with (1) sharp and widespread epidemicity in multiple locales in 2 or more geographic regions, (2) rapid progression through large open populations, (iii) high clinical-affliction rates affecting a broad range of ages, and (4) no other pandemic activity within 5 years (to adjust for the possibility of slow and interrupted pandemic spread before the mid 19th century). Especially before 1697, pandemics may be difficult to verify and track, because of slower spread [87] every bit a issue of slower and less frequent human travel. Some cited sources suggest different interpretations than those presented here (see text and references [67, 68, 72–79, 89–92]). The black bars (□) denote pandemics; the white bars (□) announce major widespread epidemics that do not meet pandemic criteria. The 1977 reemergence and global spread of an "extinct" descendant of the 1918 pandemic virus, denoted by the asterisk (*), is included here as a pandemic emergence, although information technology might too be considered equally reflecting the continuing spread of the original pandemic virus.

Preventing Morbidity and Mortality in Hereafter Pandemics

The weight of evidence, supported by mathematical modeling information [98], suggests that if a novel virus as pathogenic every bit that of 1918 were to reappear today, a substantial proportion of a potential i.nine million fatalities (assuming 1918 assault and case-fatality rates in the electric current The states population) could exist prevented with aggressive public-health and medical interventions. In an age of frequent air travel, we might expect global spread to go along rapidly and to be difficult to control, but hardly much more so than the 1918 pandemic, in which most of the world was affected past W2 within a affair of a few weeks.

Most all "then-versus-now" comparisons are encouraging, in theory. In 2007, public wellness is much more than advanced, with better prevention cognition, skilful influenza surveillance, more trained personnel at all levels, established prevention programs featuring annual vaccination with upwardly-to-date flu and pneumococcal vaccines, and a national and international prevention infrastructure. Also of import for pandemic response are 2 classes of antiviral drugs (adamantanes and neuraminidase inhibitors), one or both of which accept proven constructive, in culture, confronting nearly of the currently circulating H5N1 viruses. However, antiviral resistance might appear fairly chop-chop, and circulating H5N1 strains in several countries have already been shown to be adamantane resistant [99]. We also have antibiotics to treat pneumonias acquired by all of the major bacteria implicated in the 1918 pandemic; hospital-based intensive intendance and supportive therapy, including ventilatory support for patients with astringent ARDS; and a biomedical enquiry capacity rapidly compiling critical knowledge about many aspects of influenza.

The most difficult claiming would probably not be to increase medical cognition about treatment and prevention but to increment medical capacity and resource availability (east.m., hospital beds, medical personnel, drugs, and supplies) and public-wellness and community-crunch responses to an issue in which 25–50% of the population could autumn ill during a few weeks' time. Health-care systems could be speedily overwhelmed by the sheer book of cases; ensuring production and delivery of sufficient quantities of antivirals, vaccines, and antibiotics, too as providing widespread access to medications and medical care, especially in impoverished regions, would be a sobering challenge. And the but-in-time nature of our supply chain of necessary medications and equipment for medical care could easily exist disrupted by such a global publichealth catastrophe.

Moreover, considering most of the earth would not have access to the same level of prevention and medical care equally is bachelor to developed countries, the greatest burden of pandemic influenza would fall on those least privileged. The best hope for everyone may residuum on the future development and stockpiling of vaccines that are more than broadly efficacious—for example, "universal" influenza vaccines based on either immunogenic antigens shared by all influenza viruses [100] or multivalent HAs and NAs [101], both of which are currently beingness developed. In the meantime, efforts must exist directed toward prevention based on improved agreement of pandemic risks, increased surveillance, development of countermeasures, logistical planning, and an aggressive and broad enquiry agenda.

Information technology is noteworthy that flu enquiry during the past decade has simultaneously looked both forrard and backward in time, not merely to connect the dots but to identify slowly unfolding patterns that tin only be revealed when examined in their entirety—for example, the remarkable development of the several related pandemic influenza viruses that have appeared and circulated during the by century. The more that we learn most these viruses and about what they are capable of doing to maintain their mortiferous relationship with the human being species, the more remarkable they seem. The challenge for u.s.a. humans is to larn as much about influenza viruses as they take already learned almost usa. Arguably, we have not yet done so, but we are clearly gaining basis, and there is proficient reason to believe that the side by side decade will yield significant advances in key knowledge and, more importantly, in prevention and control. Today, nearly a century later the event, mysteries surrounding the 1918 influenza pandemic remain largely unexplained. However, we must continue to examine and investigate this long-ago tragedy, allowing it to stand clearly before united states as a challenge to complacency, as a modernistic problem with futurity implications, and as a grim reminder of the importance, to humanity, of standing the fight against emerging and reemerging infectious diseases.

Acknowledgment

Nosotros thank Jeffery Thousand. Taubenberger for helpful comments and criticisms, as well as for the histologic photographs in figure ane.

References

one.

, , , .

H5N1 outbreaks and enzootic influenza

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

iii

)

World Health Arrangement

WHO global influenza preparedness program: the function of WHO and recommendations for national measures before and during pandemics

2005

Geneva

World Wellness Organisation

US Department of Health and Homo Services

HHS pandemic flu plan

2005

Washington, DC

US Government PrintingOffice

, .

Updating the accounts: global mortality of the 1918–1920 "Spanish" flu pandemic

Bull Hist Med

2002

, vol.

(pg.

105

)

five.

Influenza: an epidemiologic written report

Monograph ser one. Am J Hyg (Baltimore)

1921

, , .

Influenza

Epidemiology in public health: a text and reference book for physicians, medical students, and health workers

1922

St. Louis

CV Mosby

(pg.

297

408

)

vii.

Epidemic influenza: a survey

1927

Chicago

American Medical Association

, .

1918 Flu: the mother of all pandemics

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

fifteen

)

, , , , .

Initial genetic label of the 1918 "Spanish" influenza virus

Science

1997

, vol.

275

(pg.

1793

)

10.

, , , , , .

Characterization of the 1918 influenza polymerase genes

Nature

2005

, vol.

437

(pg.

889

)

11.

, , .

Evidence of an absence: the genetic origins of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus

Nat Rev Microbiol

2004

, vol.

(pg.

909

xiv

)

12.

, , , .

On the origin of the homo influenza virus subtypes H2N2 and H3N2

Virology

1978

, vol.

(pg.

)

13.

, , , et al.

1918 Influenza pandemic caused past highly conserved viruses with two receptor-binding variants

Emerg Infect Dis

2003

, vol.

(pg.

1249

)

14.

, , , et al.

A single amino acid exchange in 1918 influenza virus hemagglutinin changes receptor binding specificity

J Virol

2005

, vol.

(pg.

11533

)

15.

, , , et al.

Glycan microarray analysis of the hemagglutinins from modern and pandemic influenza viruses reveals different receptor specificities

J Mol Biol

2006

, vol.

355

(pg.

1143

)

16.

, . , .

Influenza viruses

Textbook of pediatric infectious diseases

1992

, vol.

Vol Two

(3rd ed.)

Philadelphia

WB Saunders

(pg.

1688

1704

)

17.

Local Government Board

Report on the flu epidemic of 1889–ninety. Parliament [Bang-up Britain]. Papers by command [C. 6387]

1891

London

Eyre & Spottiswoode

18.

Local Government Board

Farther report and papers on epidemic influenza, 1889–92. Parliament [Groovy United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland]. Papers by command [C.-7051]

1893

London

Eyre & Spottiswoode

19.

, .

Mortality from influenza 1957–1958 and 1959–1960

Am Rev Respir Dis

1961

, vol.

(pg.

)

20.

, .

The age distribution of backlog mortality during A2 Hong Kong influenza epidemics compared with earlier A2 outbreaks

Am J Epidemiol

1971

, vol.

(pg.

348

fifty

)

21.

. .

Epidemiology of influenza

The influenza viruses and influenza

1975

New York

Academic Printing

(pg.

483

538

)

22.

The bacteriology of epidemic influenza with a give-and-take of B. influenzae as the crusade of this and other infective pro cesses. In: Members of the Faculty of the School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh.

Studies on epidemic influenza comprising clinical and laboratory investigations past members of the faculty of the School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh

1919

Pittsburgh

Academy of Pittsburgh

(pg.

161

205

)

23.

The pathology of epidemic influenza. In: Members of the Faculty of the School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh

Studies on epidemic flu comprising clinical and laboratory investigations past members of the kinesthesia of the School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh

1919

Pittsburgh

University of Pittsburgh

(pg.

207

)

24.

The pathologic anatomy of influenzal bronchopneumonia

JAMA

1919

, vol.

(pg.

650

)

25.

Disseminated necrosis of the pulmonary capillaries in influenzal pneumonia

JAMA

1919

, vol.

(pg.

1519

)

26.

Gross pathology of epidemic flu at Walter Reed General Hospital

JAMA

1919

, vol.

(pg.

924

)

27.

Comments on the pathology and bacteriology of fatal influenza cases, as observed at Camp Devens, Massachusetts

Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp

1919

, vol.

thirty

(pg.

104

)

28.

Oberndorfer

Ueber die pathologische Anatomie der influenzaartigen Epidemie im Juli 1918

Munch Med Wochenschr

1918

, vol.

(pg.

811

)

29.

Pathological beefcake of pneumonia associated with flu

Johns Hopkins Hosp Rep

1920

, vol.

twenty

(pg.

149

249

)

thirty.

Anatomía patológica de la grippe pandémica

Rev Univ B Aires

1920

, vol.

(pg.

109

)

31.

, , .,

The pathology of influenza

1920

New Haven, CT

Yale University Press

32.

, , .,

Epidemiologie, Ätiologie, Pathomorphologie und Pathogenese der Grippe

1921

Munich

JF Bergmann

33.

Privy Quango, Medical Research Council

Studies in the aetiology of epidemic flu

1922

London

Medical Research Quango

34.

The clinical features of the influenza epidemic of 1918–nineteen

Great United kingdom Ministry of Health. Reports on public wellness and medical subjects, no. 4: Report on the pandemic of influenza, 1918–19

1920

London

His Majesty's StationeryOffice

(pg.

109

)

35.

, .

An epidemic of pneumococcus bronchopneumonia

J Infect Dis

1919

, vol.

(pg.

594

617

)

36.

Pathology of the pneumonia following influenza

JAMA

1919

, vol.

(pg.

720

three

)

37.

, .

Observations on the bacteriology of flu and bronchopneumonia

J Infect Dis

1919

, vol.

(pg.

half dozen

)

38.

Main and mail-influenzal pneumonia: a comparison of the laboratory findings

JAMA

1919

, vol.

(pg.

1133

)

39.

Pathology of flu-pneumonia

J Lab Clin Med

1919

, vol.

(pg.

154

)

40.

, .

A comparison of the bacteriology of pneumonia, antemortem and postmortem

New York Med J

1919

, vol.

109

(pg.

544

five

)

41.

, .

Role of neuraminidase in lethal synergism between flu virus and Streptococcus pneumoniae

J Infect Dis

2003

, vol.

187

(pg.

1000

)

42.

, , , et al.

Comparison of clinical criteria for the acute respiratory distress syndrome with autopsy findings

Ann Intern Med

2004

, vol.

141

(pg.

440

)

43.

The influenza epidemics of 1889 and 1918

Med Clin N Am

1918

, vol.

(pg.

645

)

44.

Statistische Betrachtungen zur Grippepandemie in Breslau 1918–22

Zentralbl Bakteriol Parasitenkd Infektionskrankheiten

1923

, vol.

(pg.

372

)

45.

Influenza A virus recycling revisited

Bull WHO

1999

, vol.

(pg.

820

eight

)

46.

, , , .

Immune reconstitution in HIV-infected patients

Clin Infect Dis

2004

, vol.

(pg.

1159

)

47.

, , , et al.

Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome: pathogenesis of an emerging infectious disease

Am J Pathol

1995

, vol.

146

(pg.

552

)

48.

, , , et al.

Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome: the first 100 Us cases

J Infect Dis

1996

, vol.

173

(pg.

1297

1303

)

49.

, .

Hantavirus infection in children

Curr Opin Pediatr

2004

, vol.

(pg.

)

fifty.

, , , .

Manipulation of amnesty to and pathology of respiratory infections

Practiced Rev Anti Infect Ther

2004

, vol.

(pg.

413

)

51.

Preparing for the side by side pandemic

Due north Engl J Med

2005

, vol.

352

(pg.

1839

)

52.

, , , et al.

Re-emergence of fatal homo influenza A subtype H5N1 disease

Lancet

2004

, vol.

363

(pg.

617

)

53.

, , , et al.

Consecration of proinflammatory cytokines in human macrophages by flu A (H5N1) viruses: a machinery for the unusual severity of human illness?

Lancet

2002

, vol.

360

(pg.

1831

)

54.

Virus-host interactions: office of the innate antiviral response in the pathogenicity of pandemic influenza viruses

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

)

55.

, .

Host range restriction and pathogenicity in the context of influenza pandemic

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

881

)

56.

, , , et al.

Global host allowed response: pathogenesis and transcriptional profiling of type A influenza viruses expressing the hemagglutinin and neuraminidase genes from the 1918 pandemic virus

J Virol

2004

, vol.

(pg.

9499

511

)

57.

, , , et al.

Enhanced virulence of influenza A viruses with the haemagglutinin of the 1918 pandemic virus

Nature

2004

, vol.

431

(pg.

703

)

58.

, , , et al.

Characterization of the reconstructed 1918 Castilian pandemic influenza virus

Science

2005

, vol.

310

(pg.

eighty

)

59.

, , , et al.

Genomic analysis of increased host immune and prison cell death responses induced by 1918 influenza virus

Nature

2006

, vol.

443

(pg.

578

)

60.

, , , et al.

Characterization of cytokine/chemokine profiles of severe acute respiratory syndrome

AmJ Respir Crit Care Med

2005

, vol.

171

(pg.

850

seven

)

61.

, , , , .

SARS-CoV virus-host interactions and comparative etiologies of acute respiratory distress syndrome equally determined by transcriptional and cytokine profiling of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues

J Interferon Cytokine Res

2006

, vol.

(pg.

309

)

62.

, , , et al.

High levels of cytokine-producing cells in the lung tissues of patients with fatal hantavirus pulmonary syndrome

J Infect Dis

1999

, vol.

179

(pg.

295

302

)

63.

Antibody-dependent enhancement of infection and the pathogenesis of viral illness

Clin Infect Dis

1994

, vol.

(pg.

500

)

64.

The epidemiology of influenza

Public Health Rep

1919

, vol.

(pg.

1823

)

65.

Legislative Associates, New SouthWales [Australia]

Report of the director-general of public health, New Southward Wales, for the year 1919, including a report on the flu epidemic, 1919

1920

Sydney

William Applegate Gullick

66.

, , .

Observations on mortality during the 1918 flu pandemic

Clin Infect Dis

2001

, vol.

(pg.

1375

)

67.

, .

Influenza

Handbuch der historisch-geographischen Pathologie. Zweite, vollständig neue Bearbeitung. Erste Abtheilung. Die allgemeinen acuten Infectionskrankheiten vom historisch-geographischen Standpunkte und mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Ætiologie. ane

1881

Stuttgart

Ferdinand Enke

(pg.

)

68.

. .

Influenza. Twentieth century do

Infectious diseases

1898

, vol.

Vol 15

New York

William Wood

(pg.

ane

249

)

69.

Influenza in horses

Commissioner of Agriculture. Written report of the commissioner of agriculture for the year 1872

1872

Washington, DC

Authorities Press Function

(pg.

203

)

70.

Board of Health of the Health Department of the City of New York

"C": Report of the epizootic influenza among horses in 1872–'73

Board of Health of the Wellness Section of the City of New York. Third Annual Report. April eleven, 1872, to April 30, 1873

1873

New York

D Appleton

(pg.

242

)

71.

Registrar-Full general [Uk]

50-first almanac written report of the registrar-general of births, deaths, and marriages in England (1888)

1889

London

Her Majesty'south Stationery Office

72.

, , , .

Influenza

A treatise on the continued fevers

1881

New York

William Wood

(pg.

)

73.

, .

Flu: eine geschichtliche und klinische Studie: nach dem Russischen Bearbeitet von Dr Jos 5 Drozda

1890

Vienna

Josef Šafář

74.

Influenza or epidemic catarrhal fever: an historical survey of by epidemics in Dandy Uk from 1510 to 1890

1890

London

Percival

75.

Influenza

Creighton C. A history of epidemics in United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland. Vol 1: From AD 664 to the extinction of the plague

1891

Cambridge

Cambridge Academy Press

(pg.

397

413

)

76.

Influenza

Creighton C. A history of epidemics in Britain. Vol 2: From the extinction of the plague to the present fourth dimension

1894

Cambridge

Cambridge University Press

(pg.

300

433

)

77.

Rivista storico-clinica delle principali epidemie d'flu dal secolo 16 ai nostri giorni

1892

Alessandria

G. Panizza

78.

Influenza

Clemow FG. The geography of disease

1903

Cambridge

Cambridge University Printing

(pg.

187

203

)

79.

, . .

Geschichte, Epidemiologie und Ä tiologie der Influenza

Spezielle Pathologie und Therapie: Influenza. I Teil

1912

Vienna

Alfred Hölder

(pg.

sixteen

)

fourscore.

Influenza amnesty: new insights from old studies

J Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

193

(pg.

)

81.

, , , .

Presence of A/Equi-2 hemagglutinin and neuraminidase antibodies in human being (36245)

Proc Soc Exp Biol Med

1972

, vol.

139

(pg.

825

half-dozen

)

82.

, , , , .

Influenza neuraminidase antibody patterns in human being

Am J Epidemiol

1973

, vol.

(pg.

103

)

83.

Significant phenomena of influenza pandemics

J Lab Clin Med

1919

, vol.

five

(pg.

754

)

84.

Ministry of Health [United kingdom]

Reports on public wellness and medical subjects, no. 4: Report on the pandemic of influenza, 1918–xix

1920

London

His Majesty's Stationery Role

85.

Report on the epidemic of influenza in Manchester, 1918–19

Ministry building of Health [Great Great britain]. Reports on public wellness and medical subjects, no. iv: Report on the pandemic of influenza, 1918-xix. IV

1920

London

His Majesty's Stationery Office

(pg.

471

520

)

86.

The long-time cycles of pandemic flu

J Am Stat Assoc

1922

, vol.

(pg.

446

)

87.

Realities and enigmas of human viral influenza: pathogenesis, epidemiology and control

Vaccine

2002

, vol.

(pg.

3068

)

88.

, , , .

Swine flu A outbreak, Fort Dix, New Bailiwick of jersey, 1976

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

eight

)

89.

Flu A pandemics of the 20th century with special reference to 1918: virology, pathology, and epidemiology

Rev Med Virol

2000

, vol.

(pg.

119

)

xc.

Flu pandemics of the 20th century

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

xiv

)

91.

, , , et al.

Whole genome analysis of human influenza A virus reveals multiple persistent lineages and reassortment events among recent H3N2 viruses

Plos Biol

2005

, vol.

pg.

e300

92.

, .

Recycling of Asian and Hong Kong flu A virus hemagglutinins in man

Am J Epidemiol

1973

, vol.

(pg.

)

93.

Influenza: the newe acquayantance

Ann Intern Med

1953

, vol.

(pg.

203

)

94.

Tableau historique et raisonné des épidémies catarrhales, vulgairement dites la grippe: depuis 1510 jusques et y compris celle de 1780; avec l'indication des traitements curatifs & des moyens propres à south'en préserver

1780

Paris

Didot Jeune

95.

Of the influenza, or epidemic catarrh

Webster N. A brief history of epidemic and pestilential diseases; with the principal phenomena of the physical world, which precede and back-trail them, and observations deduced from the facts stated

1799

, vol.

Vol II

sec XII

Hartford, CT

Hudson & Goodwin

(pg.

xxx

)

96.

Die Flu: ein historischer und ätiologischer Versuch, mit einer Vorrede von Dr JFC Hecker

1836

Berlin

Theodor Christian Friedrich Enslin

97.

Annals of influenza, or epidemic catarrhal fever in Keen United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland from 1510 to 1837

1852

London

Sydenham Gild

98.

, , .

Transmissibility of 1918 pandemic influenza

Nature

2004

, vol.

432

(pg.

904

)

99.

, , , et al.

Distribution of adamantine-resistant H5N1 avian influenza variants in Asia

J Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

193

(pg.

1626

)

100.

, , .

Prospects for a universal flu virus vaccine

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

569

)

101.

, .

Vaccines for pandemic influenza

Emerg Infect Dis

2006

, vol.

(pg.

)

Potential conflicts of involvement: none reported.

jacksontray1996.blogspot.com

Source: https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/195/7/1018/800918

What Happened in Philadelphia and Baltimore That Led to the Spread of Influenza in 1918?

The 1918 Influenza Pandemic: Insights for the 21st Century

Abstruse

Origin of the 1918 Pandemic Influenza Virus

Pathogenesis and Excess Mortality in 1918–1919

Excess Deaths Among the Young and Healthy

Lower-Than-Expected Mortality Amid the Elderly

The 3 Pandemic Waves in 1918–1919: Implications for Predicting Future Pandemic Patterns

Predicting Influenza Pandemics

Preventing Morbidity and Mortality in Hereafter Pandemics

Acknowledgment

References

0 Response to "What Happened in Philadelphia and Baltimore That Led to the Spread of Influenza in 1918?"

Post a Comment

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel