Pure numbers do not paint clear COVID-19 reality

Editor:

I write in response to the Letter to the Editor by Marc Legare published in the November 12 issue of the Southwest Booster.

In his letter, Mr. Legare takes a “pure numbers approach” to compare deaths from the Spanish Flu pandemic of 19181919 and the COVID-19 pandemic, and wrongly concludes that the current pandemic barely qualifies for that description. It’s not possible to make a direct comparison solely on mathematical extrapolation because there are so many other factors in play in 2020 that were not possible in 1918.

Here are a few considerations:

- Global public health surveillance with early response to curb vital spread;

- Global telecommunications; and

- Global scientific cooperation to understand the new virus.

We have modern healthcare interventions that didn’t exist in 1918, for example:

- In 1918 doctors still anesthetized people using inhaled gasses such as chloroform or ether.

- Antibiotics had not been discovered.

- Intravenous therapy was in its infancy - the greatest advancements in IV therapy, including drugs and technology, has occurred in the last 25 years.

- Mechanical ventilation was barely functional. Think about the “iron lung” of the polio epidemic (1950s) compared to the highly-evolved microprocessor controlled ventilators we now have that are capable of any form of ventilatory support.

If we didn’t have the wonders of modern public health and modern medicine at our disposal we would surely see a catastrophic death toll. By the way, how many deaths does it take to be termed “catastrophic”? How close does it have to come to our own families and circles to be worthy?

Remember that “health statistics represent people with the tears wiped off.” (Sir Austin Bradford Hill). Never forget that the numbers so glibly thrown around represent people for whom others are left grieving. Their tears are still wet.

Glen-mary Christopher - Swift Current