The Flu Can Kill Tens of Millions of People, Like it Did in 1918

St. Louis Red Cross Motor Corps personnel wear masks in October 1918 as they hold stretchers next to ambulances in preparation for victims of the flu epidemic. (Library of Congress via AP)
St. Louis Red Cross Motor Corps personnel wear masks in October 1918 as they hold stretchers next to ambulances in preparation for victims of the flu epidemic. (Library of Congress via AP)
TT

The Flu Can Kill Tens of Millions of People, Like it Did in 1918

St. Louis Red Cross Motor Corps personnel wear masks in October 1918 as they hold stretchers next to ambulances in preparation for victims of the flu epidemic. (Library of Congress via AP)
St. Louis Red Cross Motor Corps personnel wear masks in October 1918 as they hold stretchers next to ambulances in preparation for victims of the flu epidemic. (Library of Congress via AP)

The flu arrived as a great war raged in Europe, a conflict that would leave about 20 million people dead over four years.

In 1918, the flu would kill more than twice that number — and perhaps five times as many — in just 15 months. Though mostly forgotten, it has been called “the greatest medical holocaust in history.”

Experts believe between 50 and 100 million people were killed. More than two-thirds of them died in a single 10-week period in the autumn of 1918.

Never have so many died so swiftly from a single disease. In the United States alone, it killed about 675,000 in about a year — the same number who have died of AIDS in nearly 40 years.

As the country muddles through a particularly nasty flu season — one that the Centers for Disease Control says has killed 24 children in the first three weeks of January and 37 since the start of the flu season — the 1918 nightmare serves a reminder. If a virulent enough strain were to emerge again, a century of modern medicine might not save millions from dying.

“You think about how bad it was in 1918, and you think surely our modern medical technology will save us, but influenza is the Hollywood movie writer’s worst nightmare,” said Anne Schuchat, CDC’s deputy director, at a recent seminar on the 1918 pandemic. “We have many more tools than we had before, but they are imperfect tools.”

One hundred years ago, a third of the world’s population came down with what was dubbed the Spanish flu. (It got its name when the king of Spain, Alfonso XIII, his prime minister and several cabinet ministers came down with the disease.)

The flu brought life to a standstill, emptying city streets, closing churches, pool halls, saloons and theaters. Coffin makers couldn’t keep up with demand, so mass graves were dug to bury the dead. People cowered behind closed doors for fear they would be struck down.

In Philadelphia, news stories described priests driving carts through the streets, encouraging people to bring out the dead so that they might be buried.

In New York there were accounts of people feeling perfectly healthy when they boarded the subway in Coney Island and being taken off dead when they reached Columbus Circle.

Entire families succumbed.

In Tyler County, West Virginia, John Linza, his wife and two of their sons died on the same day. Two other sons died just days before them. The last Linza, an infant, died the day after his parents.

In the southwestern tip of Virginia, J.W. Trent, his wife and two sons fell ill. They were preceded in death by all four of their young daughters — Hattie, Mary, Ellen and Ruby.

In 10 weeks, the flu killed 20,000 in New York City and produced 31,000 orphans.

There is debate among historians about where the flu first surfaced — did it come from China or a British encampment in northern France or rural Kansas? But it spread worldwide practically overnight.

By the end of November, 50,000 had died in South Africa, where at its peak flu killed 600 people each day. In Egypt, the death count reached 41,000 in Cairo and Alexandria by January. In Tahiti, trucks roamed the streets of Papeete to collect the dead, and great funeral pyres burned day and night to incinerate the bodies.

Normally the most vulnerable to influenza are infants, whose immune systems are not yet up to the test, and the elderly, whose ability to fight disease?diminishes with age. In 1918, more than half the people it killed were in the prime of their lives.

Many died within hours, turning blue from lack of oxygen as they coughed foamy blood up from their lungs and bled from the nose, ears and eyes.

The Spanish flu infected the upper respiratory tract and then dove deep into the lungs with viral or bacterial pneumonia. How did it kill so many young healthy adults? Their immune systems attacked the influenza invader with such force that it killed them.

One Army doctor, quoted by historian John M. Barry, author of the bestseller, “The Great Influenza,” described the scene at a base hospital in Massachusetts:

“When brought to the [hospital] they very rapidly develop the most vicious type of pneumonia that has ever been seen. Two hours after admission they have the Mahogany spots over the cheek bones, and a few hours later you can begin to see [the blueness] extending from their ears and spreading all over the face. … It is only a matter of a few hours then until death comes. … It is horrible.”

Yet President Woodrow Wilson was unwilling to take any action that would compromise the war effort.

In early October, even as the disease was sweeping through military bases, killing soldiers and sailors by the thousands, U.S. Surgeon General Rupert Blue warned against rushing to see doctors with “mild cases of influenza.”

“The present generation,” Blue said, “has been spoiled by having had expert medical and nursing care readily available.”

Cowering in their homes
Then as now, the catch phrase was “a touch of the flu.” The flu rolled in every winter, enveloping people in a fog and fever that lasted a few days and lingered for a week or two. It was something to be endured, but not many people died from it.

And so it began in 1918.

To comprehend what came next — and why it is possible that a deadly strain of influenza could rear up 100 years later to kill tens of millions — requires an understanding of the disease.

The world’s most successful vaccinations against measles, polio, tetanus and small pox generally work in the same way. They introduce a minuscule amount of the disease so that if it ever arrives in full-blown form, the body will recognize and neutralize it with an immune system counter attack.

Influenza, however, never gives the immune system a stable target. Instead, it can transform itself into something that appears innocent to the white blood cells and enzymes intended to wage war against it.

That explains why a vaccine against the flu is a hit-or-miss proposition, based on the best guess of scientists about what flu strains are most likely to emerge six months later. The CDC estimates flu vaccines will be about 30 percent effective against this year’s predominant strain, H3N2, but about 60 percent effective against the other influenza A strain, H1N1, and about 50 percent effective against influenza B viruses.

In 1918 there were no flu vaccinations, and it would not have mattered anyway. After the “touch of the flu” that proved deadly only here and there during the spring, the influenza apparently mutated into a killer.

By early autumn the public face of America and the Western world had a gauze mask on it. People wore them to church, the military marched in them, police posed for photos in them and doctors wore them to visit patients. In Seattle, anyone who tried to board street cars without a gauze mask was arrested.

The masks served little purpose. The fine spray of a sneeze creates a cloud of more than half a million virus particles, and the virus can live for hours on any hard surface where they settle.

Four women who gathered to play bridge in Albuquerque in November prudently wore six-ply cloth masks. Three of them were dead the next day.

The frightening spread of the disease led to official and self-imposed quarantines.

Schools, theaters, bars and other gathering places were ordered closed. Mothers were told their children should be confined to their own yards. In New York, officials so feared transmission on overcrowded subways that they ordered people to work staggered shifts.

People cowered from contact with anyone who might carry the disease. A doctor in Philadelphia spoke of driving from the hospital to his suburban home without seeing another person or vehicle on the streets.

Many flu victims died in their homes of starvation, and not the disease, because they were too weak to seek food and no one dared bring it to them.

We are still vulnerable
A century later, science has revolutionized the medical profession, producing miracle drugs and surgical procedures that no one could have imagined in 1918.

But when Thomas Frieden stepped down as head of the CDC last year he was asked in an interview what keeps him awake at night.

“We always worry about pandemic influenza because this has the potential to kill so many people,” he said. “We stockpile antivirals for an emergency. But much more is needed to both track influenza better around the world and develop a better flu vaccine.”

A “touch of the flu” kills up to 646,000 people worldwide each year, sometimes as many as 56,000 of them in the United States. Since 1918, there have been three flu pandemics. (An epidemic is when an infectious disease spreads rapidly to many people. A pandemic is a global disease outbreak).

“Obviously, we still have no control over the virus,” said Barry, the historian who gave the keynote speech in 2004 when the National Academies of Science gathered to discuss pandemic influenza. “In a lot of ways, we’re arguably as vulnerable, or more vulnerable, to another pandemic as we were in 1918 because there’s more economic interdependence.”

A universal vaccine — one that will protect against every possible flu strain — isn’t expected to emerge any time soon.

“One hundred years after the lethal 1918 flu we are still vulnerable,” warned Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), at a Smithsonian seminar on the 1918 pandemic. “Without a universal vaccine, a single virus would result in a world catastrophe.”

Could a 1918 scenario could repeat itself?

“It’s clear that we have a much greater capacity to respond, and we would expect to respond more effectively to a 1918-like virus, but we could have [a strain] more transmissible and more severe,” Daniel Sosin, the CDC’s deputy director for preparedness said at a recent Council on Foreign Relations forum.

One of the scant protections against another pandemic is the global reporting system that tracks emerging strains. If a 1918-like flu were to present itself, the system would, at least, alert the rest of the world to its deadly potential.

Jeffery K. Taubenberger and Ann Reid were the first researchers to sequence the genome of the influenza virus that caused the 1918 pandemic.

“The most important thing to do is not just to understand 1918 as a historical phenomenon,” said Taubenberger, an NIAID virologist, “but as an example of what could happen in the future.”

The Washington Post



An Iconic Puzzle Comes Home as Production of the Rubik’s Cube Returns to Hungary

Hungarian architect and inventor Ernő Rubik attends the opening event of Rubik's Cube production line of the Jasz-Plasztik plastic processing company in Jaszbereny, Hungary, 10 November 2026. (EPA)
Hungarian architect and inventor Ernő Rubik attends the opening event of Rubik's Cube production line of the Jasz-Plasztik plastic processing company in Jaszbereny, Hungary, 10 November 2026. (EPA)
TT

An Iconic Puzzle Comes Home as Production of the Rubik’s Cube Returns to Hungary

Hungarian architect and inventor Ernő Rubik attends the opening event of Rubik's Cube production line of the Jasz-Plasztik plastic processing company in Jaszbereny, Hungary, 10 November 2026. (EPA)
Hungarian architect and inventor Ernő Rubik attends the opening event of Rubik's Cube production line of the Jasz-Plasztik plastic processing company in Jaszbereny, Hungary, 10 November 2026. (EPA)

More than half a century ago, a Hungarian architect, sculptor and professor invented what would become one of the world's most popular and beloved puzzles whose appeal has spanned generations: the colorful, mind-bending, six-sided Rubik's Cube.

Now, after selling more than half a billion units and becoming a worldwide cultural touchstone, production of the cube is returning to Hungary, where its inventor, Ernő Rubik, first conceived of the iconic object that bears his name.

Hungary “is the home of the cube. The cube was born here,” Rubik, 82, said on Tuesday at the opening of a new, fully automated Rubik's Cube production line in the Hungarian city of Jászberény.

The journey of the Rubik's Cube began in 1974, when Rubik was teaching design at the Academy of Applied Arts and Design in Budapest. Seeking to create a three-dimensional object that was “infinite,” he said, he completed a prototype — then made of wood — of a cube that could rotate on multiple axes and was made up of 27 blocks.

Recognizing its consumer value, Rubik soon began producing more of the puzzles. Beginning in 1977, an initial 5,000 units of what was then called the “Magic Cube” were sold at specialty shops in the Hungarian capital.

The invention — or what Rubik prefers to describe as a “discovery” — gained popularity, and after having difficulties procuring materials for the cubes in then-socialist Hungary, he realized: “We were not prepared for that size of production ... We can’t fulfill the needs of the market worldwide.”

The cube was licensed to a British and then a US toy company, and its production was moved abroad. By the early 1980s, its popularity had exploded in what Rubik called “the first big wave,” in which he said 200 million units were sold between 1980 and 1983.

While sales of the cube dipped after its initial success, it still attracts plenty of users eager to try their hand at solving the puzzle. Millions are sold every year.

At the new production line in Hungary, a series of robotic arms assembles the cubes and tests them for functionality and durability — a level of automation Rubik said was “very different” than in the early days when the cubes were assembled by hand.

The new line in Jászberény plans to produce 1 million cubes annually.

Steve Radewych, a senior vice president with Canadian toy company Spin Master, which owns the Rubik's Cube trademark, said at Tuesday's opening that the theme of the day was: “Back to its roots: The cube comes home.”

“Ernő, your discovery is more than a toy,” Radewych told Rubik. “It's a global social phenomenon.”

Radewych noted the “incredible staying power” of the Rubik's Cube, and the fact that the puzzle continues to hold the fascination of young people even today.

“The cube represents an intellectual journey, a symbol of intelligence, problem-solving and cognitive discipline,” he added, which “has brought joy — and frustration — to many generations.”

The cube has enjoyed another surge in popularity in recent years as global competitions have proliferated, measuring who can solve the puzzle the fastest.

The current record, set only last month in China by nine-year-old Xuanyi Geng, is 2.51 seconds, according to the World Cube Association, which organizes and certifies competitions across the world.

Rubik, who does not consider himself a speed competitor, said that for him, the cube represents a “transformable sculpture,” the place where art and engineering meet and users can manipulate and change the cube in nearly endless variations.

“If you are doing something, creating something, you have the chance to do something that is meaningful — that’s one part — and beautiful,” he said.


SpaceX Starship Test to Attempt First-Ever Spaceship ‘Catch'

SpaceX's mega rocket Starship is stacked and prepared for a test flight from Starbase, Texas, Thursday, Nov. 12, 2026. (AP)
SpaceX's mega rocket Starship is stacked and prepared for a test flight from Starbase, Texas, Thursday, Nov. 12, 2026. (AP)
TT

SpaceX Starship Test to Attempt First-Ever Spaceship ‘Catch'

SpaceX's mega rocket Starship is stacked and prepared for a test flight from Starbase, Texas, Thursday, Nov. 12, 2026. (AP)
SpaceX's mega rocket Starship is stacked and prepared for a test flight from Starbase, Texas, Thursday, Nov. 12, 2026. (AP)

Elon Musk's SpaceX was poised Friday to carry out its latest test of the world's biggest and most powerful rocket, the Starship, with plans for a groundbreaking "catch" of the spaceship following a day in orbit.

A successful capture of the Starship upper stage would mark a significant milestone in the space industry's decades-long pursuit of fully reusable spacecraft that can drastically reduce mission costs and make frequent travel possible.

"If successful, this will mark the first full recovery of an orbital launch system and a breakthrough moment in making Starship a reliable, rapidly reusable rocket," SpaceX said.

For the 15th Starship test flight Friday, SpaceX aims to recover both stages of the massive 124-meter (407-foot) launch vehicle.

The company has caught the booster, dubbed Super Heavy, on three previous occasions, with the first stage descending vertically back to the launch site shortly after blastoff and nestling into mechanical "chopstick" arms.

It will now attempt to do the same with the spaceship. Some versions of the vessel are designed to launch internet satellites and data centers into orbit, while others will be made to ferry people to the Moon and Mars.

A spacecraft that can be fully reused is the "Holy Grail" of the space industry, said Clayton Swope, an aerospace expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"No one's really been able to do that so far," he said. "People have been trying to do that since the (NASA) space shuttle. But the space shuttle ended up being kind of a compromise because a lot of the vehicle wasn't reusable."

Reusing the Starship spacecraft would require the vessel to withstand the extreme heat of reentering Earth's atmosphere and then return to service without extensive refurbishment.

- Refueling challenge -

Musk, the world's richest person, has already revolutionized the space sector with the partially reusable Falcon rockets, which are regularly employed to launch satellites and carry astronauts to the International Space Station.

The Starship project, however, has been plagued by years-long delays as SpaceX grapples with novel engineering challenges -- even as NASA is counting on the spaceship to serve as a lunar lander for its Artemis program.

Other technical challenges include transferring fuel to Starship in orbit -- a requirement for any journey to the Moon or Mars.

Following SpaceX's high-profile stock market debut in June, the company carried out the first orbital flight of Starship in September, though the mission was cut short due to an engine issue.

It is also investing heavily in additional launch sites for its mega-rocket in Louisiana and Florida.

- Complex capture -

Friday's launch is scheduled to take place at SpaceX's "Starbase" in southern Texas at 4:45 pm (2245 GMT).

Following liftoff and the mid-air separation of the two stages, SpaceX plans to bring Super Heavy back to Earth six and a half minutes later, catching it at the launch site on the Gulf of Mexico coastline.

The spaceship will continue to reach Earth's orbit, where it will deploy 26 satellites into Musk's Starlink satellite internet constellation that has become a major revenue stream for SpaceX.

It will then circle the planet 14 times, before returning 22 hours later and -- SpaceX hopes -- descending safely into the chopstick arms.

This capture attempt is more complex than that of the booster, as the spaceship will be descending much faster and from a much greater altitude.

SpaceX has said it would proceed with these maneuvers only if conditions are optimal, and in the past has made last-minute changes to test flights under Musk's "fail fast" strategy of learning through crashes, explosions and other mishaps.

As of late Thursday, the US Federal Aviation Administration had not yet given its final approval for the test flight.


Delhi Overtakes Lahore as World’s Most Polluted City as Air Quality Drops

Traffic moves on a smoggy morning as air pollution spikes in New Delhi, India, November 13, 2026. (Reuters)
Traffic moves on a smoggy morning as air pollution spikes in New Delhi, India, November 13, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Delhi Overtakes Lahore as World’s Most Polluted City as Air Quality Drops

Traffic moves on a smoggy morning as air pollution spikes in New Delhi, India, November 13, 2026. (Reuters)
Traffic moves on a smoggy morning as air pollution spikes in New Delhi, India, November 13, 2026. (Reuters)

India's capital Delhi overtook Lahore in Pakistan to become the world's most polluted city on Friday, with air quality reaching hazardous levels and visibility dropping as smog blanketed the city of 20 million people.

Air quality index (AQI) in Delhi was "hazardous" at 334, making ‌it the ‌most polluted global major ‌city, ⁠according to Swiss group ⁠IQAir, which measures air quality levels based on the concentration of toxins.

An AQI reading up to 50 is considered good with little or no ⁠health risk.

India's official ‌Central Pollution ‌Control Board pegged the AQI higher at ‌403 and rated it "severe".

The ‌Swiss and Indian readings vary due to the different AQI scales and methodologies used to calculate and ‌classify air pollution levels.

Cars and motorcycles emerged from dense ⁠smog, ⁠which also appeared to obscure streetlights on the city's main roads, videos from news agency ANI showed.

Pollution is a seasonal problem in many parts of northern India and neighboring Pakistan, as the cold, heavy air of winter traps vehicle emissions, construction dust and smoke from agricultural burning.