1,400 orphans in San Francisco: The devastating Spanish flu spared young people

They sent all sick babies all over town as the flu-stricken area disappeared at San Francisco Hospital on October 29, 1918.

It was one of the darkest days in the city’s history, with a baby-filled sedan leaving the hospital past an arriving ambulance carrying an adult San Franciscan in the advanced stages of pneumonia. That day, more than 75 people died of the flu. And the children who still had a separated mother were lucky children.

“There were dark-eyed and fair-skinned babies, big and small,” Chronicle reported from a children’s hospital that afternoon. “Everything was pale and (and) everything was silent. No one was attended by the mother and father. Many have been orphaned since coming to the big hospital.”

It makes no sense to argue whether the pandemic of the so-called Spanish flu of 1918-1919 or the coronavirus of today has worsened. The early flu was much more severe, killing nearly 100 San Francisco people a day at one point. The new virus is long-lasting and has been hit further financially.

However, there is one area where the tragedy was one-sided. This is enough to make parents grateful during the most gracious years of 2020. The flu that broke out in 1918 spared a young life. If anything, it seemed to target them.

In early 2020, we received news that older people, not younger children, were most susceptible to COVID-19. By May Data enhanced the news.. A total of nearly 16,500 people died between February 1st and May 20th this year in New York City, which was hit hard, and New York City health officials said that one woman under the age of 25 died during that period. I reported that it wasn’t.

Influenza in 1918-1919 had the highest mortality rate for infants in their 20s and 30s, accounting for 3% of both populations. According to one study Both Philadelphia and New York were devastated by the disease. It was a virus that appeared to be devised to target young children to create surviving orphans.

“In the case of the Spanish flu, the age profile of death looked dramatically different.” Hannes Schwandt wrote In a May 26 report on COVID-19 pregnancy at Northwestern University’s Institute of Policy Studies. “They were very concentrated in infants and young adults. The majority of women died at childbearing age, especially pregnant women.”

It is unclear why the elderly escaped most of the early pandemics. Studies suggest that early influenza exposure may have built immunity.

Chronicle flu coverage in October 1918 mercilessly optimistic spins on most developments, even if the flu fills hospitals and forces the Red Cross overflow ward to be set up in civic centers and primary schools. Brought. Newspapers reported daily that the city had experienced the worst and was on the way to recovery. (It wasn’t.)

However, the unsigned October 29 article gave a generous view of the flu that hits at least 3,500 San Francisco citizens, rather than the strictest estimate of the death toll from the 1906 earthquake.

“Wherever I went today to take the patient, I need to come back tomorrow and take the other members of the family,” hospital steward JG Tohma told Chronicle. “As I know, if people can only know the flu, it’s always okay to wear a mask.”

Schools were closed due to the virus and nurses and doctors became ill, so some teachers were hired to take care of the sick children. Reports of family divisions were common.

“They are at every stage of suffering, and some are so capricious that they can’t be named,” Chronicle reported on October 30, 1918, recording the hospitalization area of ​​a children’s hospital. “… the baby didn’t know the name, and only knew that the mother wasn’t there. They looked for the mother, but couldn’t find it.”

The apparent peak of influenza arrived on November 1, 1918, killing 98 San Francisco people with the virus in one day. (As of December 17, 2020, 173 urban residents Reported dead From COVID-19 for the whole year. )

Accurate census data for 1918-1919 influenza in San Francisco is confusing, but Chronicle published some statistics from city health leaders at the time. By the end of October 1918, the city’s average monthly mortality rate of 630 had almost tripled to more than 1,800, boosted by the virus. Of the influenza deaths confirmed that month, 198 were under the age of 25 and 631 were between the ages of 25 and 44. 90 were over 44 years old. The tally did not include many reported yet-born babies during the pandemic.

City declared victory Health leaders and politicians were clearly heard about the flu on November 20, 1918. When the whistle blew downtown at noon, the San Francisco people threw masks into the gutters.

When arrogance is tragic The virus has returnedKilled at least 1,200 San Franciscos in 1919 — this time “Anti-mask league” It urged citizens to ignore potentially life-saving public health orders.

No one remembered the 1918-1919 flu in San Francisco, but the deaths now seem abstract. But they did a devastating blow to the city. The February 28 Chronicle Story, released when the second and final wave was weakening, confirms that San Francisco children were suffering disproportionately.

“The flu epidemic has put a strain on the city, leaving 1,400 orphans, many of whom are public accusations.” I read the headline.

Medical leaders such as San Francisco Chief Health Officer William C. Hustler, Chief Surgeon WC Billings, and Red Cross President John A. Briton said the lasting effects of influenza would be felt by children in San Francisco. I told Franciscan.

“Surgeon Billings said the flu killed about eight times as many lives as those who died on the US military (World War I) battlefield,” Chronicles reported. “Britton said it was time to recognize the need for charity at home as much as he was grateful to the victims of the war zone.”

Peter Hartlaub is a cultural critic of the San Francisco Chronicle. Email: [email protected] twitter: @PeterHartlaub