Monash Asia Initiative, Faculty of Arts, Monash University, Caulfield, VIC 3145, Australia.
Department of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Feb 23;21(3):261. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21030261.
We conducted a comparative historical study to interrogate Professor Peter Doherty's warning to Australians in April 2020 that 'COVID-19 is just as lethal as the Spanish flu'. We identified the epicentres of both pandemics, namely, metropolitan Sydney in 1919 and metropolitan Melbourne in 2020 and compared the lethality of the Spanish Flu and COVID-19 in these two cities. Lethality was measured by the number and rate of hospital admissions, death rates, age-specific death rates and age-standardised mortality rates (ASMRs). Using these measures, we demonstrated the strikingly different waves of infection, their severity at various points in time and the cumulative impact of the viruses by the end of our study period, i.e., 30 September in 1919 and 2020. Hospital admissions and deaths from the Spanish Flu in 1919 were more than 30 times higher than those for COVID-19 in 2020. The ASMR per 100,000 population for the Spanish Flu was 383 compared to 7 for COVID-19: The former was about 55 times higher than the latter. These results suggest that the Spanish Flu was more lethal than COVID-19. Professor Doherty's warning was perhaps taken seriously and that partly explains the findings of this study. Containing infection in 1919 and 2020 threw the burden on nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as 'protective sequestration' (quarantine), contact tracing, lockdowns and masks. It is likely that the persistent and detailed contact tracing scheme provides the best possible explanation for why NPIs in 2020 were more effective than in 1919 and therefore contributed to the lower lethality of the COVID-19 pandemic in its first year.
我们进行了一项比较历史研究,以探讨彼得·多尔蒂教授在 2020 年 4 月向澳大利亚人发出的警告,即“COVID-19 与西班牙流感一样致命”。我们确定了这两种大流行的中心,即 1919 年的悉尼大都市和 2020 年的墨尔本大都市,并比较了这两个城市中西班牙流感和 COVID-19 的致命性。致死率通过住院人数和住院率、死亡率、特定年龄死亡率和年龄标准化死亡率(ASMR)来衡量。使用这些措施,我们展示了感染的截然不同的浪潮,它们在不同时间点的严重程度以及到我们研究结束时,即 1919 年 9 月 30 日和 2020 年,病毒的累积影响。1919 年西班牙流感的住院和死亡人数是 2020 年 COVID-19 的 30 多倍。每 10 万人的 ASMR 西班牙流感为 383 比 COVID-19 为 7:前者是后者的约 55 倍。这些结果表明西班牙流感比 COVID-19 更致命。多尔蒂教授的警告可能被认真对待,这部分解释了本研究的结果。控制 1919 年和 2020 年的感染使非药物干预(NPIs)的负担加重,如“保护性隔离”(隔离)、接触者追踪、封锁和口罩。很可能是持续和详细的接触者追踪计划为 2020 年的 NPIs 比 1919 年更有效提供了最佳解释,因此导致 COVID-19 大流行第一年的致死率降低。