It's just the flu

>it's just the flu

holy shit

>it's just a few tribes

>a song killed 50- 100 million people
wtf how?

That graph: Halloween kills.

Spaniard cough.

> The Coosa city-states, in western Georgia, and the Caddoan-speaking civilization,centered on the Texas-Arkansas border, disintegrated soon after Soto appeared. The Caddohad had a taste for massive architecture: public plazas, ceremonial platforms, enormous monuments. After Soto’s army left,notes Timothy K. Perttula, an archaeological consultant in Austin, Texas,the Caddo stopped building community centers and began digging community cemeteries. Between Soto’s(1539)and La Salle’s(1682)visits, Perttula believes, the Caddoan population fell from about 200,000 to about 8,500—a drop of nearly 96 percent. In the eighteenth century the tally shrank further, to 1,400. An equivalent loss today in the population of New York City would reduce it to 56,000—not enough to fill Yankee Stadium. “That’s one reason whites think of Indians as nomadic hunters,” says Russell Thornton, an anthropologist at the University of California at Los Angeles. “Everything else—all the heavily populated urbanized societies-was wiped out” because diseases spread more quickly and easily through dense cities than hunter-gatherers.

Spanish Flu was pretty spooky with how most of the mortality was in young adults as opposed to children or the elderly.

>One reason is that Indians were fresh territory for many simultaneous plagues, not just one. Smallpox, typhoid, bubonic plague, influenza, mumps, measles, whooping cough—all rained down on the Americasin the century after Columbus. (Cholera, malaria, and scarlet fever came later.) Having little experience with epidemic diseases, Indians had no knowledge of how to combat them. In contrast, Europeans were well versed in the brutal logic of quarantine, even if it was their only real weapon against disease. They boarded up houses in which plague appeared and fled to the countryside. In Indian New England, Neal Salisbury, a historian at Smith College, wrote in Manitou and Providence(1982), family and friends gathered with the doctor/priestat the sufferer’s bedside to wait out the illness—a practice “that could only have served to spread the disease more rapidly.”

was this inevitable? Has there ever been a time in history when contact could be made between the new and old world without diseases relatively mundane diseases like the flu and measles causing mass death for the Amerindians?

Prior to the invention of agriculture

If the Americans had more time to develop urban civilizations and develop continental trade lines between the north, central, and southern centers, they would have had more experience with epidemic diseases. To my understanding the spread of mass plauge was only afflicting Europe since the classical Roman eras, only a (relatively) brief 1000 years of experience. But ultimately with their low level of development, the best they could hope for is to have equally deadly endemic diseases like the tropical parts of Africa that inhibited European colonization.

You re wrong. Their urban civilization was more advanced than European at that time(especially Mexico and Andean) and they had long trade routes(how do you think Inca get hit before even seeing one Spaniard).
Thing is they had more homogenized population, their immune system was more oriented on fighting parasites than diseases and they lack domesticated animals and lack exposure to their diseases.
To be honest Europe at that time(especially western one) was poor dirty place always under threat of starvation. It did not had big technological advantage even or numbers but they had GERMS.
Similar situation happen in East where Nomadic population(Tatars and other Siberian population) get decimated by diseases and their weakened power(alongside with infighting a common thing when diseases strike repeatedly) and it allow Moscow rise to power and expansion into Siberia.
Just before contact Amerinds have better diet, bigger and clean cities/urban centers and zero resistance to European and African GERMS.
Pretty much. You would need to quarantine whole continent and stop all contacts. They lack experience with diseases and there were no cure.

>Actually, some Old World populations were just as vulnerable as Native Americans to those diseases, and likely for the same reason. Indians’ closest genetic relatives are indigenous Siberians. They did not come into substantial contact with Europeans until the sixteenth century, when Russian fur merchants overturned their governments, established military outposts throughout the region, and demanded furs in tribute. In the train of the Russian fur market came Russian diseases, notably smallpox.

>The parallels with the Indian experience are striking. In 1768 the virus struck Siberia’s Pacific coast, apparently for the first time. “No one knows how many have survived,” confessed the governor of Irkutsk, the Russian base on Lake Baikal, apparently because officials were afraid to travel to the affected area. A decade later, in 1779, the round-the-globe expedition of Captain James Cook reached Kamchatka, the long peninsula on the Pacific coast. The shoreline, the British discovered, was a cemetery. “We every where met with the Ruins of large Villages with no Traces left of them but the Foundation of the Houses,” lamented David Samwell, the ship’s surgeon. “The Russians told us that [the villages] were destroyed by the small Pox.” The explorer Martin Sauer, who visited Kamchatka five years after Cook’s expedition, discovered that the Russian government had at last ventured into the former epidemic zone. Scarcely one thousand natives remained on the peninsula, according to official figures; the disease had claimed more than five thousand lives. The tally cannot be taken as exact, but the fact remains: a single epidemic killed more than three of every four indigenous Siberians in that area.

>After a few such experiences, the natives tried to fight back. “As soon as [indigenous Siberians] learn that smallpox or other contagious diseases are in town,” the political exile Heinrich von Füch wrote, “they set up sentries along all the roads, armed with bows and arrows, and they will not allow anyone to come into their settlements from town. Likewise, they will not accept Russian flour or other gifts, lest these be contaminated with smallpox.” Their efforts were in vain. Despite extreme precautions, disease cut down native Siberians again and again.

>After learning about this sad history I again telephoned Francis Black. Being genetically determined, Indian HLA homogeneity cannot be changed (except by intermarriage with non-Indians). Did that mean that the epidemics were unavoidable? I asked. Suppose that the peoples of the Americas had, in some parallel world, understood the concept of contagion and been prepared to act on it. Could the mass death have been averted?

>“There have been lots of cases where individual towns kept out epidemics,” Black said. During plague episodes, “medieval cities would barricade themselves behind their walls and kill people who tried to come in. But whole countries—that’s much harder. England has kept out rabies. That’s the biggest success story that comes to mind, offhand. But rabies is primarily an animal disease, which helps, because you only have to watch the ports—you don’t have many undocumented aliens sneaking in with sick dogs. And rabies is not highly contagious, so even if it slips through it is unlikely to spread.”

>“I’m trying to imagine how you would do it,” he said. “If Indians in Florida let in sick people, the effects could reach all the way up to here in Connecticut. So all these different groups would have had to coordinate the blockade together. And they’d have to do it for centuries—four hundred years—until the invention of vaccines. Naturally they’d want to trade, furs for knives, that kind of thing. But the trade would have to be conducted in antiseptic conditions.”

>The Abenaki sent goods to Verrazzano on a rope strung from ship to shore, I said.

>“You’d have to have the entire hemisphere doing that. And the Europeans would presumably have to cooperate, or most of them, anyway. I can’t imagine that happening, actually. Any of it.”

>Did that mean the epidemics were inevitable and there was nothing to be done?

>The authorities, he replied, could “try to maintain isolation, as I was saying. But that ends up being paternalistic and ineffective. Or they can endorse marriage and procreation with outsiders, which risks destroying the society they supposedly are trying to preserve. I’m not sure what I’d recommend. Except getting these communities some decent health care, which they almost never have.”

>Except for death, he went on, nothing in medicine is inevitable. “But I don’t see how it [waves of epidemics from European diseases] could have been prevented for very long. That’s a terrible thought. But I’ve been working with highly contagious diseases for forty years, and I can tell you that in the long run it is almost impossible to keep them out.”

Excuse me but your graph is bullshit, Mexico had a population of 6,837,100 in 1803 as according to Cuenya Mateos's '[The population of Mexico (1821-1880). Elements for its study].'. I would hardly dare to bother comparing the other years.

Graphs are nice and simple to read aren't they?

Area coverage is probably different. Thus different results.

...

If the graph says 'Mexico' then it covers Mexico

Now this is more like it

Political borders or geographical one?
I assume that your census from 1803 was from area of Mexico(country) in 1803. You are aware that this borders changed soon.
Graph could use current borders or geographical terms or some other. We do not know.