15,697
edits
Changes
no edit summary
====The 1918 Flu Pandemic and Masks====
By the autumn of 1918 in the United States, it was clear the flu pandemic was becoming out of control and that surging cases across the country required public health officials to issue direct guidance for people to wear masks. For some states, masks were seen as part of policies such as social distancing, washing hands, and general cleanliness to avoid the spread of the virus. Some cities in the Western United States, including some cities now where we see hostility to wearing masks, passed laws that required masks to be worn at all times by the autumn of 1918. This included Phoenix, San Francisco, and even Juneau, Alaska (Figure 1). Punishments ranged from fines to imprisonment in cities. While most punishments for not wearing a mask were fines, prison sentences did occur. There was one infamous incident in San Francisco, where a special officer hired by the Board of Health to enforce mask wearing, shot a man who had earlier refused to wear a mask; two bystanders even were hit by the shooting. In another case in San Francisco, at a boxing match attended by many dignitaries from the city and government, a photographer shot a photo of that night and the well known individuals present. That photograph led to many officials being shamed for not wearing masks. People who were caught not wearing masks included a congressman, a court justice, a Navy rear-admiral, a health officer and the mayor. This led to fines for these officials and public shaming, although none of these individuals were imprisoned as others had been. Nevertheless, most people or places that had rules requiring masks generally had no major issues or incidents. Only after substantial declines in deaths and infections did most of these cities that passed mask-wearing laws gradually removed the requirement about masks.<ref>For more on laws and ways cities got people to wear masks in the 1918 flu pandemic, see: Crosby, Alfred W. <i>America’s Forgotten Pandemic: The Influenza of 1918</i>. 2nd ed. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.</ref>
[[File:3a049913-e8f6-4e22-927c-df23ca2fa036-Mask style article.jpg|thumb|left|Figure 2. Masks being shown as fashion items, with some ways suggested makiing the masks useless. ]]
Masks in 1918, however, have been criticized for being ineffective or at least limited in preventing spread of the 1918 virus. The American Public Health Association in December 1918 concluded that wearing mask should be compulsory for medical staff, barbers, dentists, and other occupations that come into close contact with other individuals. However, it found masks were not always beneficial, but that mainly had to do with the materials they were made from or incorrect use of masks. Thus, the board recommended that only workers in close contact wear them and others who wish to do so should be instructed on the proper way in making and wearing masks. A later study in 1927 did, however, show that those who wore masks generally did help to limit the spread of the 1918 virus. The study also determined there were many misconceptions of what masks were for and this was part of the problem. Masks should be presented to the public as devices that help infected people from spreading their infection, whereas many people saw them differently and took them to even be a stigma. The study recognized also there is likely hostility in wearing masks in countries emphasizing individual freedom. The study made clear that masks should be presented as something that should be worn because it reflects the presence of a serious disease where public and community health is more important than individual rights at a given time.<ref>For more on this study looking at the effectiveness of masks in 1918, see: Jordan, Edwin. <i>Epidemic Influenza: A Survey</i>. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1927. </ref>
