Talk:1918 flu pandemic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article 1918 flu pandemic has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Medicine (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article was selected on the Medicine portal as one of Wikipedia's best articles related to Medicine.
WikiProject Viruses (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject History (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Disaster management (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Death (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Globalization (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:


Numbers?[edit]

The introduction says 50 to 100 millions and 3 to 5 percent. It is obvious that these numbers do not match. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.33.144 (talk) 13:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

The discussion leading to these figures was here: Talk:1918_flu_pandemic/Archive_2#100_million_?. I think the figures are reasonably correct, with the 3% figure best represented as 2.5%. Apparently someone rounded it. Binksternet (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Another problem which I would put in the numbers section is the claim that the disease killed mainly young adults, rather than the young or older adults. But this is not borne out by the graph given on the page. Spanish flu was still much more fatal for young children and older people, it is just that it showed higher than normal levels of fatal for those in early and mid adulthood. Whilst I accept that this is a picky point, I think we should strive for accuracy and the claim, as currently presented is inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTAllenby (talkcontribs) 16:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Spanish Flu called as such due to wartime censorship?[edit]

No authentic citation given. Links to "channel 4" which doesn't contain reference to this fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.225.29 (talk) 22:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Is paragraph beginning "On 16 September 2008" somewhat redundant?[edit]

About para. On 16 September 2008, the body of British politician and diplomat Sir Mark Sykes was exhumed to study the RNA of the flu virus in.. is it necessary in this context - many were disinterred and this exhumation failed and was unsuccessful so why mention here? FactoProphyl (talk) 13:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Removed contradiction tag[edit]

I removed the contradiction tag, as susceptibility of soldiers to infection and the higher fatality rate among the strongest immune response groups are totally different subjects and do not contradict current medical understandings of the mortality and morbidity rates and causes of influenza.Wzrd1 (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Theories[edit]

It appears the geographical origin of the pandemic has been pinpointed.

If I was one to pun, I'd say this was a US fowl, not just mere horseplay. Paradoctor (talk) 11:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC)