Did you have a cold the past year? I did not. All because of the social distancing.
Turns out if you personally avoid people and crowds (social distancing) and if indoor places are closed there's fewer situations to get any virus.
Unless the virus comes on Amazon packages or through the air in the back yard.
Kids have been massively more sheltered too. Either by parents or because schools were literally closed.
It's a good thing that we are reopening the society by Autumn, so we can have a nice wave of colds, flu and COVID by people that didn't catch anything in 1 year. (As in, I worry a bit about what Autumn will bring).
I didn't back in 2020 during the most strict lockdowns, but afterwards sure, plenty of colds. And I hate to brag, but I have a (light) cold right now. :-)
For the record, there was nothing special about those after-lockdown-colds compared to regular colds.
Based on my own experience and that of other parents I know, I would say that we've sheltered our kids, but as soon as school was back on it was game over.
Was reading a healthcare forum where doctors were giving multiple examples of people with advanced cancer that would have been curable 1 year ago when the patient first noticed it, but now requires major intervention with an uncertain outcome.
That happened pre-pandemic, too. Some people hate going to the doctor, others are trying to avoid paying their deductible for what turns out to be something benign, etc. Confirmation bias may also be at play.
It'll be a while before we know the impact in a data-driven rather than anecdote-driven fashion.
I'm sure a qualified actuary will be able to take this data along with models of expected outcomes and give you (well not you, but an insurance company) a fairly good idea of the consequences in terms of lives lost over the next 5 years or so.
This happened in most countries that were hit hard. We’re talking going from a packed schedule of preventative screenings and elective surgeries to zero.
> The immune system will continue to deal with the viruses as it normally does.
Even if you know nothing about medicine, just from the fact that the COVID vaccines need booster shots you should be able to induce that the immune system in fact has a time component to it, and therefor any timeframe has an impact on it's ability. With a little more knowledge on the topic you can see that a single year of basically blocking everyhing off from your immune system makes it less powerful. The flu season will be devastating, and the long term effects of blocking kids from training their immune systems will be even worse.
I don't think a booster shot is a good example, lots of other vaccinations are administered in 3 shots. On others, the current view is that one is enough for life. If there is really a degradation in immune capability, is there any evidence of that from other vaccinations not working as well as in the past?
How far the immune system is actually depressed from the lockdowns etc., we will find out. Could also be the other way around, i.e. overreaction. What I have not observed since things are getting back to normal in my part of Europe is that everyone gets a cold etc. as soon as they meet more people.
Your premise that everything was "blocked off" from people's immune systems is wrong and the whole argument falls apart. This is incidentally also addressed explicitly in the article.
We've lived millions of years in the lifestyle of the lockdown (many parts of the world still do) and for a few freakish millennia, some parts of society sort of managed in the style being resumed..
Probably, and I haven't experienced lockdown in the UK, but in the US and Norway, even people being quite careful see more than just their immediate household.
It's been pretty loose in the UK. Even during the strictest lockdown, which only lasted a couple of weeks, you could still go out for exercise, go to shops for "essentials" (the definition was liberal). People went to exercise and just happened to be walking 2 metres away and in the same direction as their friends. Hardly house arrest.
In some places. But at any given time many people lived in relative isolations, i.e. Winters alone with family, while in most times no one could have been in a high enough density where you didn't know everyone. So this normal is imaginary while lockdown is like a normal lifestyle even if it wasn't the only lifestyle at all times.
I guarantee you that most people back then would've been hunting, farming, building huts or rearing children. There is no model of the past where this level of isolation was even maintainable. People simply depend on each other to live.
All that changed is that we've outsourced that direct dependence with indirect dependencies, like supermarkets.
Just before the crisis I was watching a documentary on a tribe of herdsmen that come together once a year to find mates.. They have probably been doing that longer than Rome has existed. The idea that the modern world is very much like our environment during our evolution is delusional. An effect of being joined to the western Europeans for colonized people was significant deaths from diseases that can only exist in abnormal densities of people.
My position is AFAICT the same in the entire thread. There is nothing "obviously" wrong and harmful with a lifestyle because it looks different than a modern lifestyle (that is not the result of tuning for positive mental health, but a lot of game theory toward the opposite) and that not everyone leads even today. Tribe size averages don't mean every family everywhere was connected with people outside their immediate family more often than required to reproduce. Plenty of herders still spend most of their time in their atomic family in Turkik places, Africa, etc and have done so since before agriculture. Are they all obviously mentally ill because they don't go to supermarkets?
(To me this is the same observation as that many people first experience schizophrenia at the stage when they are most likely going off to school, the school environment is a change and not obviously more defective for our mental health, those who have crisis might have unhealthy family relationships before hand, etc, etc.)
My city is in lockdown right now, with no contact allowed with anyone outside of the household. I can't see how the human race would have survived in such circumstance for very long, let alone millennia.
I’d love to see any statistics to support that claim. Anecdotally I disagree with that risk assessment but I don’t have any hard data on the risk(s) associated with social isolation.
"Most" is a very strong word to use in this situation. How do you back that up? Demographic data? Psychological profiles of those demographics? Or just because you want it to be true?
A country severely affected by covid like Brazil has seen its population decline for the first time ever since the Portuguese set foot. People were asphyxiating to death in Manaus because hospitals couldn't meet the oxygen tanks' demand with patients coming in hordes. It’s that bad.
The amount of people that committed suicide due to depression induced by isolation is several orders of magnitude less.
It’s sad and scary that we still have to have this conversations in well educated forums like HN one and a half years in this pandemic.
At this point, your average (pre-Covid) developed world immune system was already like a home-schooled kid suddenly being thrown into a cocktail party.
No, don’t lick more door knobs. In the rural environments you have more germs but not everything there is out to infect humans. A good fraction of the crap in door knobs is here to kill you.
The correct advice is to grow up in a farm or a wooded area. Eat everything as soon as you can. Visit Africa as a child and get a worm or two in you.
You argued that homeschooled children would essentially fail when exposed to a fairly normal social situation. As someone who was homeschooled from pre-k until I went to college and whose social circle 20 years later still includes a huge number of people who were homeschooled I can say that this stereotype doesn't really hold true in my experience. Most homeschooled children get plenty of opportunities to socialize with peers. I certainly knew of a few homeschooled kids who were socially awkward, but I also knew plenty of kids who attended traditional school who were similarly inclined. Two decades after I graduated I can say conclusively that professional outcomes of the homeschooled kids look as good or better than the non-homeschooled children I know.
As to your initial point regarding immune systems, I find that to be a fairly simplistic view as well. While children today may not be exposed to some things as much as they used to, the amount of travel and food transportation likely results in a much more diverse amount of viral and bacterial exposure than a few generations ago. We have some anecdotal evidence (although with lots of confounding factors) that people in countries with a higher percentage of children having grown up around agriculture have suffered worse than rich world countries.
> We have some anecdotal evidence (although with lots of confounding factors) that people in countries with a higher percentage of children having grown up around agriculture have suffered worse than rich world countries
As with all good internet journalism, the answer is at the end:
> The immune system is 'not a muscle.' All this begs the question: Will kids have more severe infections after the COVID-19 pandemic if their immune systems missed out "training" during winter lockdowns? Carsten Watzl, the secretary general of the German Society for Immunology, says we may see more infections, but not necessarily more severe ones.
TL;DR: Eating dirt won't work out your immune system because it doesn't work like that
How come it’s not a muscle if the vaccination works?
Obviously getting more sick isn’t going to make your immune system stronger, but just getting sick is going to make it learn how to make antibodies for specific illnesses.
Exposure to smallpox wiped out populations in two continents from no prior exposure. The quoted “not necessarily” isn’t a ringing endorsement. Chickenpox is another example of early exposure/vaccine or very bad things happen.
> Chickenpox is another example of early exposure/vaccine or very bad things happen.
Side note, even early exposure may not help. I got it twice and the second was rough. It also carries a higher risk of shingles later in life and could impact the nervous system. Please consider vaccinating your kids against chickenpox.
Complex systems are, well..., complicated. Policy choices always have trade-offs, most side-effects are only obvious with hindsight.
I think it will be years, and it will take hundreds of thousands of person/years of research to really assess what we did wrong and what we did right in the pandemic. And it is best to be this way, as any conclusions we come to now are going to be probably contaminated with politics.
I am completely pessimistic that any substantive learning will come from this entire mess. It's already political; any results will either be massively and inappropriately influenced by politics, and/or valid results will just be scoffed at by one side or the other, depending on the result.
I have no faith in major world powers to not use this as a continued power grab and cynical boost to their voting base.
See, my country saw some 300 years of democracy. At that point the progressives used a trick to pass a new constitution proclaiming all people to be equal. Conservatives felt their rights were violated so hard, they passed a resolution inviting neighbouring countries to intervene and another one for the army to stand down. Mere 200 years later all political options agree that was not very bright of them. Just give it some time.
Maybe it’s time to let go of this comfortable idea that we are a animal doing natural things in nature. We are really like Yuval Noah Harari said Homo dues. We are letting go of this idea of natural a long time a go and we have been interfering with our own immune systems, environment and what not for centuries. Maybe we will get yearly shots to strengthen our immune system from the flu to train it some how and not get sick. oh wait that exists already and is common practice. The flu shot.
> Maybe we will get yearly shots to strengthen our immune system from [all kinds of infectious pathogens]
I already do.
I have to self-administer subcutaneous immunoglobulin twice per week due to having a rare immune mediated disease affecting my peripheral nervous system. Subcutaneous inmunoglobulin is a blood product, which is administered under the skin, which contains antibodies from tens of thousands of paid donors, as required by law for the each batch.
I have not gotten a cold in about 5 years because of it. It also helps me recover from illnesses (for example food poisoning this year) quicker.
However, the antibodies being infused does not train my immune system to produce them (applies to everyone) as the memory effect from the administration does not exist.
Through health insurance. It’s a medicine approved by government agencies (FDA, EU Medicines Agency, SwissMedic, etc.). It’s administered the same way as an insulin pump. The only big difference is that a much larger volume is being infused.
How do they prevent self-reaction, given that the foreign Ig isn't subject to negative selection in the thymus? Do they intensively monitor you for rashes, inflammation, etc.? Could it ever be life threatening?
I suppose the fact that you aren't getting immune cells makes it so any self-reaction wouldn't grow and spread via adaptive immune amplification / proliferation and become a new autoimmune disorder. So at least there's that.
Ya flue shots are almost a waste of time. A good diet, regular cardiovascular exercise and adequate sleep are 1000x more effective at keeping us healthy.. not to mention all the other positives that cone with that lifestyle. The healthy, natural one. Even looking at Covid, close to 80% of people at ICU's are obese. Spare me the shots, lets go running.
Roughly 25-50% based on the strain. Hardly “waste of time” territory.
There seems to be some evidence that regular exercise (5ish days per week) reduces the impact of upper respiratory infections (I.e. the common cold) by about that amount, but much less evidence that influenza is similarly affected or affected at all.
So for now, if you are choosing between the flu shot and exercise to reduce influenza, the choice is clear. Of course exercise is awesome for other reasons, just maybe not as awesome as a vaccine for influenza.
I heard this theory right at the start when lockdowns started but I don't buy it. If nobody is getting colds and flus, then there are no colds or flus to get. The viruses can't just keep going on their own while we hide away. They need us.
The cold and flu viruses haven't gone away. They continued circulating, just at a lower level (in some countries). As soon as pandemic control measures are relaxed those viruses quickly come back.
There are sizeable non-human animal reservoirs for many viruses, including other coronaviruses (which are one cause of many for the "common cold") and influenza.
Mine's on fine form. I've ignored this virus; no mask, no vaccine - no problem. This whole episode seems to me to be financial incentives and vocal minorities.
65 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 124 ms ] threadTurns out if you personally avoid people and crowds (social distancing) and if indoor places are closed there's fewer situations to get any virus.
Unless the virus comes on Amazon packages or through the air in the back yard.
Kids have been massively more sheltered too. Either by parents or because schools were literally closed.
It's a good thing that we are reopening the society by Autumn, so we can have a nice wave of colds, flu and COVID by people that didn't catch anything in 1 year. (As in, I worry a bit about what Autumn will bring).
Bubble boy meets bubble society.
For the record, there was nothing special about those after-lockdown-colds compared to regular colds.
Based on my own experience and that of other parents I know, I would say that we've sheltered our kids, but as soon as school was back on it was game over.
LOL
It'll be a while before we know the impact in a data-driven rather than anecdote-driven fashion.
I'm sure a qualified actuary will be able to take this data along with models of expected outcomes and give you (well not you, but an insurance company) a fairly good idea of the consequences in terms of lives lost over the next 5 years or so.
A qualified actuary will likely admit to uncertainty on something unprecedented like the first pandemic in the modern era.
Not sure you need much data when countries like Canada were canceling all elective surgeries during their Covid waves.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/covid-19-ontario-hosp...
This happened in most countries that were hit hard. We’re talking going from a packed schedule of preventative screenings and elective surgeries to zero.
The backlog will take years to clear.
Even if you know nothing about medicine, just from the fact that the COVID vaccines need booster shots you should be able to induce that the immune system in fact has a time component to it, and therefor any timeframe has an impact on it's ability. With a little more knowledge on the topic you can see that a single year of basically blocking everyhing off from your immune system makes it less powerful. The flu season will be devastating, and the long term effects of blocking kids from training their immune systems will be even worse.
How far the immune system is actually depressed from the lockdowns etc., we will find out. Could also be the other way around, i.e. overreaction. What I have not observed since things are getting back to normal in my part of Europe is that everyone gets a cold etc. as soon as they meet more people.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5756541/
All that changed is that we've outsourced that direct dependence with indirect dependencies, like supermarkets.
Which would be completely ok, except you never explained how your position has changed nor what it is you are now arguing against.
(To me this is the same observation as that many people first experience schizophrenia at the stage when they are most likely going off to school, the school environment is a change and not obviously more defective for our mental health, those who have crisis might have unhealthy family relationships before hand, etc, etc.)
The amount of people that committed suicide due to depression induced by isolation is several orders of magnitude less.
It’s sad and scary that we still have to have this conversations in well educated forums like HN one and a half years in this pandemic.
Eat more dirt. Lick more doorknobs.
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/42/eaba2578
At this point, your average (pre-Covid) developed world immune system was already like a home-schooled kid suddenly being thrown into a cocktail party.
The correct advice is to grow up in a farm or a wooded area. Eat everything as soon as you can. Visit Africa as a child and get a worm or two in you.
You're not going to get river blindness from licking a door knob.
I downvoted you because this is an idiotic statement.
You argued that homeschooled children would essentially fail when exposed to a fairly normal social situation. As someone who was homeschooled from pre-k until I went to college and whose social circle 20 years later still includes a huge number of people who were homeschooled I can say that this stereotype doesn't really hold true in my experience. Most homeschooled children get plenty of opportunities to socialize with peers. I certainly knew of a few homeschooled kids who were socially awkward, but I also knew plenty of kids who attended traditional school who were similarly inclined. Two decades after I graduated I can say conclusively that professional outcomes of the homeschooled kids look as good or better than the non-homeschooled children I know.
As to your initial point regarding immune systems, I find that to be a fairly simplistic view as well. While children today may not be exposed to some things as much as they used to, the amount of travel and food transportation likely results in a much more diverse amount of viral and bacterial exposure than a few generations ago. We have some anecdotal evidence (although with lots of confounding factors) that people in countries with a higher percentage of children having grown up around agriculture have suffered worse than rich world countries.
No. I said home-schooled kids would be less proficient at navigating a cocktail party vs their other-schooled peers.
> likely results in a much more diverse amount of viral and bacterial exposure than a few generations ago
Here's a recent study on modern urban microbiome diversity: https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(21)00585-7 . Summary, it's complicated.
> We have some anecdotal evidence (although with lots of confounding factors) that people in countries with a higher percentage of children having grown up around agriculture have suffered worse than rich world countries
Do you have a source?
> The immune system is 'not a muscle.' All this begs the question: Will kids have more severe infections after the COVID-19 pandemic if their immune systems missed out "training" during winter lockdowns? Carsten Watzl, the secretary general of the German Society for Immunology, says we may see more infections, but not necessarily more severe ones.
TL;DR: Eating dirt won't work out your immune system because it doesn't work like that
Obviously getting more sick isn’t going to make your immune system stronger, but just getting sick is going to make it learn how to make antibodies for specific illnesses.
Side note, even early exposure may not help. I got it twice and the second was rough. It also carries a higher risk of shingles later in life and could impact the nervous system. Please consider vaccinating your kids against chickenpox.
> TL;DR: Eating dirt won't work out your immune system because it doesn't work like that
This isn't a good analogy at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene_hypothesis
I think it will be years, and it will take hundreds of thousands of person/years of research to really assess what we did wrong and what we did right in the pandemic. And it is best to be this way, as any conclusions we come to now are going to be probably contaminated with politics.
I have no faith in major world powers to not use this as a continued power grab and cynical boost to their voting base.
I already do.
I have to self-administer subcutaneous immunoglobulin twice per week due to having a rare immune mediated disease affecting my peripheral nervous system. Subcutaneous inmunoglobulin is a blood product, which is administered under the skin, which contains antibodies from tens of thousands of paid donors, as required by law for the each batch.
I have not gotten a cold in about 5 years because of it. It also helps me recover from illnesses (for example food poisoning this year) quicker.
However, the antibodies being infused does not train my immune system to produce them (applies to everyone) as the memory effect from the administration does not exist.
I suppose the fact that you aren't getting immune cells makes it so any self-reaction wouldn't grow and spread via adaptive immune amplification / proliferation and become a new autoimmune disorder. So at least there's that.
Either way, you are given prescriptions for acetaminophen/paracetamol and Benedryl. I don’t take them at all, nor am I required to.
I also have to keep an Epi-Pen on hand while infusing, but this is a rare side effect and especially so for subcutaneous.
At first, I had mild rashes, but now as my body has gotten used to it, it’s meager lumps from the infusions which disperse over a couple of days.
But, I really have no side effects from the infusions whatsoever.
Roughly 25-50% based on the strain. Hardly “waste of time” territory.
There seems to be some evidence that regular exercise (5ish days per week) reduces the impact of upper respiratory infections (I.e. the common cold) by about that amount, but much less evidence that influenza is similarly affected or affected at all.
So for now, if you are choosing between the flu shot and exercise to reduce influenza, the choice is clear. Of course exercise is awesome for other reasons, just maybe not as awesome as a vaccine for influenza.
The viruses can survive just fine without us.