Social distancing in the time of disease is ages old, but we haven't had to practice it in the U.S. for many years. We need to now.



Editor's note: In late March, the World Health Organization recommended using the term “physical distancing” to reinforce the need for people to remain connected socially while they remain physically separated to prevent the spread. Read more about this change in the Washington Post.



So, we’re all supposed to be social distancing. What the heck is that?

This weird new quasi-dystopic phrase has been at the top of every public health hit list as one of the best ways to squelch the new coronavirus currently cutting a brutal swath through the sick, the elderly and the vulnerable of the world, including those being treated for cancer.

While the term may be puzzling and new, the concept is actually quite old. We’ve been “distancing” ourselves from sick people for ages. Ostracizing people with leprosy was a harsh (and wrongheaded) form of social distancing back in the day. The strategy was used to much better effect in the influenza epidemic in 1918 where cities that quarantined sick patients and closed schools, theaters and churches cut their death rate in half.

Hunkering down is just something humans have to do now and then to keep weird new diseases from trying to take us out. But almost none of us have had to do it within our lifetimes so it seems incredibly odd, even in the increasingly disconnected internet age.

But look at the data. Take in the graphs, the number of countries involved (it’s at 125 now). In Washington state, where the U.S. outbreak has been the largest so far, scientists believe the number could grow to 64,000 cases by May if unchecked. It’s led officials to enact dramatic public health emergency restrictions.

COVID-19 is here. And without a vaccine or any known therapy, the resulting number of infections may quickly overwhelm hospitals and health care systems. Particularly since none of us have immunity to this virus.

