Okay, you start.

I'm not a sociologist, historian or epidemiologist and am unfamiliar with statistical modeling. Any theories I have would be superficial at best and crackpot at worst.

Not everywhere has shut down as much as the US (and other places have shut down more tightly) so it will be interesting to see the relative "deaths per million" once it blows over, which could take a long time as shutting down merely flattens the curve, which extends the process and could produce a higher number of deaths than would have just letting it run its course.

It is impossible to make an accurate comparison between different locations as they are so different from each other in terms of population density and human vulnerability (age, health etc.)

The biggest obstacle to a meaningful comparison between countries is that each has its own system of recording a death. Not all will test all deaths to see if Covid-19 was the cause, and others may assign another cause if, for example, there was a pre-existing condition.

To your point as to why the extreme measures now and not then. I took a small piece form a previous reply

"It was a completely different world then. There was no internet - it hadn't been invented yet. There was no such thing as a portable telephone. There was no cable TV, and color TV was still new enough that many households didn't own a color TV set. "

This is a double edged sword. Parts of the government aided by the media are much more likely to shape our thoughts and beliefs now. There are no more sheeple now than in previous eras but those who control information have a MUCH greater influence.

But we can brainstorm, can't we? We often look for layperson insight on forums like these, no? And if a real pro happens to chime in, so much the better.

My reading, from the SWAGs so far, is that because we didn't have the technology to communicate and track instantly like we do now, we didn't know how serious the threat was until it was over. Plausible enough, and I thank those that offered up their thoughtful replies. When we're able to put aside our love of snark, real learning sometimes happens on these boards!

However (isn't there always a however?), I'm not sure I fully buy that explanation. First, there was some serious social distancing going on during the internet-bereft 1918 Spanish flu pandemic. Second, during the 1957 and 1968 pandemics, we didn't have the technology we have now, but scientists/epidemiologists/MDs certainly were able to communicate with each other around the world in real time. And I'd be very surprised if Health Departments around the world were not sharing information with each other, and with the WHO, which by the way was founded in 1948.

In 1968, Walter Cronkite could tell us how many Americans died in Vietnam everyday, so I'm pretty sure hospitals around the world could track and report their influenza cases too.

I hear the Villages is teeming with archivists, archeologists and epidemiologists. It would be great if they could help us unlock the mystery. Maybe the answer is simply that the world just wasn't in the mood to shut down either time. Or it just didn't occur to anyone to do so.

Just saw the posts invoking the media as probable players. I agree it is remarkable how we allow the media to shape public opinion and public policy. Their power is astounding. Another thought that comes to mind is China was hit first and they imposed rigid restrictions. I believe we had no choice but to follow suit. Could you imagine the condemnation if we didn't follow China's example and allowed thousands of people to die?

Hmmm, now that I think of it, I wonder if the conspiracy theorists have considered the influence of China's "example." Maybe their lockdown was a charade knowing we'd do the same and in the process bring down our economy. Disclosure: I'm not a conspiracy theorist (except for that little something that happened in 1963 which the majority of Americans agree is a little fishy*), but I do let my mind wander.

*The One Thing All Americans Agree On: JFK Conspiracy

As fast as everything has happened in such a short time, and no it wasn't the media's fault that so many people have been infected and/or died, I think it will be interesting to read these threads in 4-6 weeks from now and see how everyone's viewpoint (or conspiracy theories) has either changed-or been reinforced.

Of course it is not the media's fault that people died. The discussion is about the unprecedented reaction to the virus. But thanks for jumping in.

My comment was precipitated by more than one poster (in numerous threads) implying, that the "unprecedented reaction" was caused in part by modern day media and it's ability to immediately relay information worldwide, compared to previous pandemics, and that in part some way contributed to the infections and deaths of this one.

No need to thank me for anything though, as I believe I have the same right to post my own opinions and observations, just as you have done.

Have a wonderful evening.