Thread by @ProfLWiley

2010 article by Nancy Tomes on the 1918 pandemic chock full of resistance by churches, businesses, & public, conflicts b/w govts over who had authority & whether to order closures or focus on masks & distancing while keeping gathering places open. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…

"The most important lesson of the [1918] pandemic was that the measures that worked the best—bans on public gatherings, school closures, & strict quarantine & isolation [of infected/exposed]—were precisely the ones most difficult to implement in a modern mass society."

"Authorities had difficult choices to make. They could impose city-wide bans on public gatherings, which
typically included closing schools, saloons, theaters,
& more rarely stores....

... A less drastic approach allowed
public places to stay open but required additional
preventive measures, such as staggered opening times,
strict observance of sanitation rules, and mask wearing."

Many factors played into the path a particular
city followed, not the least of them timing. In the two cities hit early, Boston & Philadelphia, death rates rose so
steeply & quickly that authorities felt
they had no choice but to impose sweeping public gathering bans....

"Yet their decision to close schools, theaters, & other gathering places came too late to prevent the wide spread of the disease. The leaders of other cities, blessed with a little more time to prepare, had to decide what strategies to adopt...

"As had happened in earlier epidemics, businessmen resisted the idea of mass closures of transportation & businesses that would cause economic distress both to owners and workers. (At least one employee filed a lawsuit to recover lost wages due to such a closure.)...

"Closing schools left parents with children to provide for during the day. Shutting down saloons & theaters meant not only lost revenue for owners but also lost pleasures for their customers."

"NYC's Health Commissioner decided not to impose a
full-scale public-gathering ban. Instead, he urged
businesses and theaters to stagger their opening and
closing times so that the crowds in streets and on subway lines would be minimized."

"Unlike NYC, many cities did pass more
sweeping public-gathering bans for at least a short
period during the 1918–1919 pandemic. While in
retrospect it may seem obvious that these bans were
both necessary and justified, they met with considerable opposition."

In PA, IN, & IL, state boards of health imposed strict public gathering bans that local departments opposed & even circumvented. E.g., Chicago’s Health Commissioner initially allowed theaters to stay open on the condition
they maintained good ventilation systems."

"But in what Variety described as a victory for the 'downstate villagers,' Illinois authorities issued a state-wide closure order that included theaters."

Fascinating how the dynamic is reversed now w/ many city mayors seeking tighter restrictions, opposed by rural areas.

"Public-gathering bans [imposed by cities & states in 1918] also exposed tensions about what constituted essential vs. unessential activities. Those forced to close their facilities complained about those allowed to stay open."

"E.g. in NOLA, authorities closed churches but not stores, prompting a priest to argue if churches had to be closed, then the “. . . big business establishments, crowded from early morning til evening [should] be also required to close.”

Identical to Kavanaugh in South Bay.

"Theater owners often voiced the 'why us and not
them' argument. In many cities they were the first,
& sometimes the only, businesses to be shut down...

"By October 1918, 90% of American theaters were on 'the dark list.' Theater owners faced a difficult problem: they didn't want to appear irresponsible in the face of a public health emergency, yet they resented being singled out for closures."

Bars & restaurants in TX now.

"In St. Louis, 'a delegation of 15 theatrical
& picture men' called on the mayor 'objecting
to the epidemic’s closing order' & asking him to 'extend it to department stores, 10-cent stores, elevated & street
cars.'

Theater managers "offered to provide posters advertising the dangers & methods of combating the epidemic & to give full aid in publishing health department propaganda on the screens when reopening.” But the mayor did not relent, & the theaters lost an estimated $150,000 a week."

"Even in cities that passed sweeping bans on public
gatherings, people couldn't live in total isolation.
Most residents had to venture out of their homes into the germ-ridden realm of public spaces" necessitating hygiene measures re: sanitation, cough etiquette & face masks.

"In retrospect, some of the preventive measures practiced during the 1918 pandemic seem painfully ineffective.
For example, so strong was the belief in the infective power of street dust that cities all over the country invested considerable time & money in daily street washing."

"While common in hospital operating rooms by World War I, mask wearing by lay people was among the most novel public health practices introduced in the 1918 pandemic. Public health authorities promoted mask use as a measure that would allow cities to function."

"When cities lifted public-gathering bans [in 1918], they often did so with the proviso that people wear masks when attending theaters. Mask wearing gained considerable popularity as an emblem of public spiritedness and discipline."

"Although the gauze mask received the
greater degree of publicity, the handkerchief got an
equally big boost from public health authorities. Starting in September 1918, public health officials urged
the public to use their hankies as cloth shields when
coughing or sneezing."

"Likely one big reason for the emphasis on handkerchief use was its ease of practice. Compared with gauze masks, which were expensive to buy and uncomfortable to wear, the cheap, easily washed handkerchief was a good substitute."

"the public health villains blamed for careless coughing, spitting, & sneezing during the flu pandemic were frequently represented in posters, cartoons, & advertisements promoting handkerchief
use as men behaving badly."

Hi, 1918? It's 2020 calling: theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…

"The flu pandemic offered a teaching moment in which masculine resistance to hygiene rules associated w/ mothers, school marms, & Sunday school teachers could be replaced w/ a more modern, manly form of public health, steeped in discipline, patriotism, & personal responsibility."

"Public health authorities pushed masks & handkerchiefs in spite of questions about their effectiveness. Herein lays the irony of public health education during the pandemic: pushing the 'gospel of germs' was not likely to stop the epidemic, but it had to be done."

George Soper in 1919: 'if doubt arises as to the probable efficacy of measures which seem so lacking in specificity it must be remembered that it is better for the public morale to be doing something than nothing & the general health will not suffer for the additional care."

"This odd combination of futility & certainty would
continue to characterize summaries of the 'lessons
learned' from the great pandemic."