Flu and colds are back with a vengeance(nature.com)
nature.com
Flu and colds are back with a vengeance
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-03666-9
273 コメント
AFAICT this isn't the case
Is this a "as far as I can tell based on my knowledge of immunology" or "as far as I can tell based off of personal experience and gut feeling"?
I mean, what you're saying sounds plausible, but on the other hand it also sounds plausible that maybe periodic exposure to random viruses and stuff does strengthen your immune system, so I'm curious if your take here is actually based in science or is just an off-the-cuff idea.
Is this a "as far as I can tell based on my knowledge of immunology" or "as far as I can tell based off of personal experience and gut feeling"?
I mean, what you're saying sounds plausible, but on the other hand it also sounds plausible that maybe periodic exposure to random viruses and stuff does strengthen your immune system, so I'm curious if your take here is actually based in science or is just an off-the-cuff idea.
This is what immunologists are saying pretty much everywhere you look. I thought "AFAICT" was clear enough that 1) I have tried to find this out and 2) from what I can tell the preponderance of opinion from people who seem qualified to say so is that your immune system doesn't "weaken" because you are avoiding infection. Even TFA quotes an immunologist calling the idea of individual-level immune system weakening "nonsense". I could also be wrong or looking at the wrong sources. I don't want to stop anyone from looking this up themselves, finding out what experts are saying, and making a judgment of their own. We don't have to stick with folk science or what "sounds plausible".
My comment was mainly to point up the analogy for seeing more infections today primarily because there were fewer infections before, not primarily because everyone's immune system is weakened. There are of course other concerns with disease burden and herd immunity overshoot. I do fear people are stretching the Windows Update analogy too thin, as your immune system isn't a computer and the dynamics are more complex (e.g. it doesn't matter if you avoid Covid Alpha and don't ever become perfectly immune to it, because there is hardly any of it circulating anymore, and your Omicron infection has some cross-immunity).
My comment was mainly to point up the analogy for seeing more infections today primarily because there were fewer infections before, not primarily because everyone's immune system is weakened. There are of course other concerns with disease burden and herd immunity overshoot. I do fear people are stretching the Windows Update analogy too thin, as your immune system isn't a computer and the dynamics are more complex (e.g. it doesn't matter if you avoid Covid Alpha and don't ever become perfectly immune to it, because there is hardly any of it circulating anymore, and your Omicron infection has some cross-immunity).
As far as I can tell based off of personal experience, HN is full of armchair experts on topics outside their realm of expertise. Heck, I even play one myself now and then.
Yup. And the more strongly opinions are given, the more uptight they get when you ask for a cite or two (with a few honourable exceptions).
Appeals to authority only get you so far.
The strength of your immune system is the energy your body has to provide.
What's influenced/improved through (accidental or controlled/vaccines) exposure is it memory.
Although exposure can also have other consequences on the whole body, if the system is overwhelmed/can't cope.
What's influenced/improved through (accidental or controlled/vaccines) exposure is it memory.
Although exposure can also have other consequences on the whole body, if the system is overwhelmed/can't cope.
You are not answering the important question in the parent: is this "as far as I can tell based off of personal experience and gut feeling"?
The past two years have demonstrated the state of the art w.r.t. infectious disease may not be as great as advertised. So likely gut feeling.
It's more like a current understanding of various takes of professionals on the "immunity debt" concept, especially in children:
* https://twitter.com/FurnessColin/status/1589103107048624129 (which has an additional interesting take about measles) * https://twitter.com/lisa_iannattone/status/15762315127179919... * https://twitter.com/unbiasedscipod/status/158891593499112652... * https://counterdisinformationproject.substack.com/p/immunity...
which is not necessarily intuitive as well, but still, at this point, makes way more sense than the "immune system is a muscle" discourse.
* https://twitter.com/FurnessColin/status/1589103107048624129 (which has an additional interesting take about measles) * https://twitter.com/lisa_iannattone/status/15762315127179919... * https://twitter.com/unbiasedscipod/status/158891593499112652... * https://counterdisinformationproject.substack.com/p/immunity...
which is not necessarily intuitive as well, but still, at this point, makes way more sense than the "immune system is a muscle" discourse.
My youngest has gotten RSV twice this year, which is hard to do, among about 15 other illnesses, including COVID multiple times, flus and cold, etc.
It’s bad even by ‘2 yr old at daycare’ standards.
5 ER trips and a hospitalization due to breathing difficulties bad.
It’s bad even by ‘2 yr old at daycare’ standards.
5 ER trips and a hospitalization due to breathing difficulties bad.
Sorry to hear that. I’m a parent and that sounds scary and awful
Except the issue with the delay is captured by your analogy perfectly:
> You'll be slammed with updates when you turn it on.
For a computer that isn’t an issue. But consider the health impact of “getting slammed” with several months, or take to an extreme, several years of missed immunity “updates”
> You'll be slammed with updates when you turn it on.
For a computer that isn’t an issue. But consider the health impact of “getting slammed” with several months, or take to an extreme, several years of missed immunity “updates”
Even for computers; for a critical system I'd rather plan some small incremental updates regularly to keep it healthy and under control rather than do nothing for a few years and suddenly go a mega-update of the whole kernel + shared lib + dependencies in one go, hoping that everything is going to be OK.
But in theory a computer should not have those issues. It’s just in practice.
Even in theory, our bodies pay a non-zero cost for each “update”
Even in theory, our bodies pay a non-zero cost for each “update”
There are definitely datapoints that suggest lack of exposure leads to lower functioning immune system. The story of the Lykov hermits is a fairly compelling anecdote as many of them died once reintroduced to others. Of course, it could have been something else.
Native Americans
This feels like a distinction without a difference? Since much of your immune system is not replacing old protections, but modifying them, I think it is fair to question if skipping some exposure is possibly dangerous?
Granted "to question" is doing a lot of work in my last sentence there. I don't think it is a foregone conclusion. Would be very interested in seeing it explored. Closest my memory has to this is introducing kids to preschools. The new kids are always the ones getting most sick. Same for homeschoolers going to college. They will spend a ton of time catching up on sicknesses they missed out on.
Granted "to question" is doing a lot of work in my last sentence there. I don't think it is a foregone conclusion. Would be very interested in seeing it explored. Closest my memory has to this is introducing kids to preschools. The new kids are always the ones getting most sick. Same for homeschoolers going to college. They will spend a ton of time catching up on sicknesses they missed out on.
There's a difference. In the "hygiene hypothesis" model—the one where your immune system weakens without exposure—getting a cold makes you less likely to get the flu. That doesn't appear to be true. In reality, since the cold and the flu aren't biologically related, one does not confer immunity for the other.
That's not to say the "hygiene hypothesis" is completely false. There's good evidence that exposing children to low level pathogens early and often helps reduce autoimmune conditions like allergies, asthma, and arthritis. It just doesn't effect viral response.
That's not to say the "hygiene hypothesis" is completely false. There's good evidence that exposing children to low level pathogens early and often helps reduce autoimmune conditions like allergies, asthma, and arthritis. It just doesn't effect viral response.
I feel this is still framing it off? The hygiene hypothesis isn't just that your immune system weakens. It is also that you did not strengthen it. Not quite the same. And there is more to it than just getting targeted immunity to things. It could be that you get stronger nasal passages and lungs. Or whatever.
I'll underline that I don't know exactly what the answer is. I think there is plenty to research on this, and excited on us knowing a bit more.
I'll underline that I don't know exactly what the answer is. I think there is plenty to research on this, and excited on us knowing a bit more.
The cold & flu were bad examples since they do share some similarities. A better example would be food poisoning and the flu: eating spoiled food doesn't make you less likely to catch a respiratory virus.
I think I agree with what you are saying. Paraphrased/simplified, the problem is that the extreme end of the hygiene hypothesis is to have a non clean area at all.
Reminds me of the somewhat silly phrase of "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger." Unless, of course, it leaves you much much weaker. Which is very possible.
Reminds me of the somewhat silly phrase of "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger." Unless, of course, it leaves you much much weaker. Which is very possible.
Doesn’t immunity fade over time for some diseases if you’re not exposed?
I think this is more of an “it depends” situation than a hard and fast rule.
I think this is more of an “it depends” situation than a hard and fast rule.
If T-cell count and function is normal immunity should last. The idea that immunity wanes is coming from universities looking at antibodies (a different immune cell) as markers for vaccine efficacy. Industry prefers that way because waning antibodies means they'll sell more "boosters"
You shouldn't be down voted. This is mostly correct. Cellular immunity is durable in most recovered patients. People can expect to get reinfected occasionally but subsequent infections typically have less severe symptoms.
Boosters are a good option for many people (talk to your doctor). But using antibody levels as a basis for scheduling boosters is completely unscientific. As a society we can't boost our way out of the pandemic.
This panel discussion with a group of leading physicians goes into more detail on the issue.
https://youtu.be/jAjKQY0_BQA
Boosters are a good option for many people (talk to your doctor). But using antibody levels as a basis for scheduling boosters is completely unscientific. As a society we can't boost our way out of the pandemic.
This panel discussion with a group of leading physicians goes into more detail on the issue.
https://youtu.be/jAjKQY0_BQA
Epidemiologists are gathering more and more evidence for what has been dubbed the "hygiene-hypothesis", namely that lack of education of the immune system at an early age increases the risk for several diseases including asthma, IBS, several auto-immune disorders among others.
https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/consumers-biolo...
https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/consumers-biolo...
Right, but that has no bearing on response to viruses. Having the cold doesn't make it less likely for you catch the flu, for instance.
definitely does, a cold infection can protect the airways from a flu infection[1]. Cross reactivity of T cells very much exists. Another case is particular variants of covid-19 which is a corona virus granted partial immunity to influenza (one reason people suggested why both cold and flu seasons during covid peaks slowed considerably, apart from containment measures), and certain corona viruses that cause the common cold in turn also granted partial immunity against covid.
[1]https://news.yale.edu/2020/09/04/common-cold-combats-influen...
[1]https://news.yale.edu/2020/09/04/common-cold-combats-influen...
Cold & flu weren't the best examples. Here's a more obvious one: getting food poisoning doesn't make you less likely to catch the flu.
Some people treat "the immune system" like a muscle, where stress strengthens. Similar stressors can have cross-reactive effects, but unrelated ones do not.
This can go the other way too: people who have uncontrolled celiac disease (as in, they're still consuming gluten on a regular basis) can also have issues with avenin (a somewhat similar protein in oats) or even lactose. For a lot of folks those sensitivities disappear when they get their gluten consumption down.
Some people treat "the immune system" like a muscle, where stress strengthens. Similar stressors can have cross-reactive effects, but unrelated ones do not.
This can go the other way too: people who have uncontrolled celiac disease (as in, they're still consuming gluten on a regular basis) can also have issues with avenin (a somewhat similar protein in oats) or even lactose. For a lot of folks those sensitivities disappear when they get their gluten consumption down.
Interesting comment on gluten consumption. In my case, it appears cumulative. (I'm not celiac, so far as I know.) I've been following a non-gluten diet for fifteen years at this point, and I can now tolerate at least a small amount of gluten without the effects I used to have.
I used to get injections to diminish my hay fever symptoms. I finally mostly grew out of hay fever around the age of forty, though I'm still allergic to horses and cats, if I have direct contact.
Don't those injections comprise increasing challenges to the immune system using the allergens themselves, to make it less prone to mount a histamine response (i.e. runny nose, itchy eyes)?
I used to get injections to diminish my hay fever symptoms. I finally mostly grew out of hay fever around the age of forty, though I'm still allergic to horses and cats, if I have direct contact.
Don't those injections comprise increasing challenges to the immune system using the allergens themselves, to make it less prone to mount a histamine response (i.e. runny nose, itchy eyes)?
I don't think it has much to do with restrictions being lifted. They didn't seem to impede the spread of sars-cov-2. What was stopping the spread of more familiar respiratory viruses was likely viral interference with sars-cov2. The now much higher level of naturally acquired immunity to sars-cov-2 is most likely why other viruses are coming back.
Maybe? Schools being closed was a real thing that put a pretty heavy stop on spread.
They haven't been closed in most places for well over a year. And these kids still co-mingled. It's not like they just hung out alone in their rooms.
You aren't wrong. But, the question is how many viral seasons they have been open. You don't expect 100% spread in a single season.
We're also not seeing sars-cov2 spiking to high levels now along with RSV/et. al. This further suggests restrictions being lifted doesn't adequately explain all of the apparent phenomena.
Are we not, though? Covid hasn't gone away, and it seems to grow every season. Deaths are down, so that is very very good.
That said, I did not take that to mean that restrictions would be the only active component. I don't see any reason to think we can isolate this down to just a single prime mover.
That said, I did not take that to mean that restrictions would be the only active component. I don't see any reason to think we can isolate this down to just a single prime mover.
Deaths from COVID-19 are way down because at this point almost everyone has already been infected at least once. The patients who were going to die from it are mostly already dead. Those deaths were tragic, but for the rest of us the combination of vaccination, natural immunity, and general health status makes it no longer a serious concern (or at least not much more serious than other endemic respiratory viruses).
Deaths are down because we learned how to treat the critical cases.
Hensley says that this is because the population “is more immunologically naive than what we would expect in most years”. Normally, children get infected by their second birthday. Now, “you’re going to end up having kids that are three, four years of age right now who have never seen RSV”.
...it reminds me of the phenomenon that, the longer you go between busts/economic recessions, the worse they tend to be, because you will tend to have more zombie companies ready to go under. Sometimes what seems like preventing a problem, is actually just storing up problems to experience all at once at a later date.
...it reminds me of the phenomenon that, the longer you go between busts/economic recessions, the worse they tend to be, because you will tend to have more zombie companies ready to go under. Sometimes what seems like preventing a problem, is actually just storing up problems to experience all at once at a later date.
Based on my (admittedly) anectdotal evidence: there's been very little mask wearing for almost a year, and in that time a very large percentage of the people I've known have gotten various colds and/or COVID. (This summer, it seems almost everyone who hadn't had it yet, finally got it.)
The big shift happened when they lifted the mask mandate for schools here in early 2022: Our kids came back with a cold every 2 weeks, for approximately 2.5 months. That was not fun.
All of which is to say that it's not clear at all that we've been "storing up" a problem -- and if we have, much of it has already been let out of storage, so to speak.
The big shift happened when they lifted the mask mandate for schools here in early 2022: Our kids came back with a cold every 2 weeks, for approximately 2.5 months. That was not fun.
All of which is to say that it's not clear at all that we've been "storing up" a problem -- and if we have, much of it has already been let out of storage, so to speak.
Counter-anecdote. I've never worn a mask, not once. I live in London - noteworthy population size and density. Still waiting to experience something resembling covid - I'll settle for a cold.
It would seem to me masks are precisely "storing up" the problem, especially with children and younger people who are not that much at risk. In retro, I guess masks and lockdowns only delayed the inevitable, which to some extent was justified, but I think as this article suggests, it has a price.
I'm not sure what you mean by "not that much at risk", the parent posted
> Our kids came back with a cold every 2 weeks, for approximately 2.5 months. That was not fun.
Noting also that frequent colds can lead to lifelong asthma conditions
Noting further that we really don't know the long-term effects of Covid on young people (both in the more frequent case of a speedy recovery and in the less frequent "long Covid").
Masks in school, and basic good hygiene (washing hands, having the school disinfect contact surfaces such as doorknobs multiple times per day, ...) go a long way to keeping everyone safe and healthy.
> Our kids came back with a cold every 2 weeks, for approximately 2.5 months. That was not fun.
Noting also that frequent colds can lead to lifelong asthma conditions
Noting further that we really don't know the long-term effects of Covid on young people (both in the more frequent case of a speedy recovery and in the less frequent "long Covid").
Masks in school, and basic good hygiene (washing hands, having the school disinfect contact surfaces such as doorknobs multiple times per day, ...) go a long way to keeping everyone safe and healthy.
I certainly don't want healthy children wearing masks in school. What a dystopian notion. It's horrifying how some cruel and scientifically ignorant school authorities inflicted collective punishment on schoolchildren with mask mandates.
> It's horrifying how some cruel and scientifically ignorant school authorities inflicted collective punishment on schoolchildren with mask mandates.
Even if they did work, there is a cost / benefit that needed to be calculated that never was. All these “experts” myopically focused on one exact thing to the literal exclusion of everything else. And if you did raise objections or concerns you were (and still are) subject to a bunch of horrible retaliation.
Even if they did work, there is a cost / benefit that needed to be calculated that never was. All these “experts” myopically focused on one exact thing to the literal exclusion of everything else. And if you did raise objections or concerns you were (and still are) subject to a bunch of horrible retaliation.
After forcing kids to spend the lion's share of their childhood sitting at a desk the mask part seems trivial.
I haven’t looked at any data, but I wonder if the cold -> asthma correlation might be reversed, ie asthma as a condition leads to more vulnerability to colds
There is at least some pathogen->asthma correlation.
One of the things that doctors did was compare asthma rates between people who were already working from home to asthma rates of people who suddenly got thrown home due to Covid.
Asmtha went down more than expected in the people who suddenly got thrown home than in the folks who were already working from home. Since both groups faced roughly the same kind of environmental conditions (ie. pollution going down due to less driving), the excess decrease is posited to be purely due to pathogens.
Apparently, a not insignifcant chunk of asthma attacks are due to basically swimming around in continuous, low levels of pathogenic exposure.
One of the things that doctors did was compare asthma rates between people who were already working from home to asthma rates of people who suddenly got thrown home due to Covid.
Asmtha went down more than expected in the people who suddenly got thrown home than in the folks who were already working from home. Since both groups faced roughly the same kind of environmental conditions (ie. pollution going down due to less driving), the excess decrease is posited to be purely due to pathogens.
Apparently, a not insignifcant chunk of asthma attacks are due to basically swimming around in continuous, low levels of pathogenic exposure.
Unless you’re proposing permanent masking in schools, masks were absolutely deferring the problem, leaving the cost to be paid all at once.
That was one of purposes though. If every one caught COVID at the same time then hospitals would be overrun and some people would die as a result of lack of access. Masking and isolation flattened the curve to spread it out over longer time. Also allowed time for less deadly versions to overtake so when you did get it then it was less bad in general.
That was the stated justification communicated through structured propaganda, yes.
There were people (I’m people) saying this a long time ago. It became obvious that the only value of masking and lockdowns was to avoid short term hospital overflows and such measures should only have been in effect for a period of weeks during a few spikes. Otherwise the only thing anybody was doing is delaying when not if they got covid by up to two years.
But covid measures became irrational.
But covid measures became irrational.
Not sure why this is getting gray because this absolutely was the plan back in march of 2020. I recall UK government stating “everybody will get it, we just need to buy a few weeks to prepare hospitals for the hordes of sick patients”.
Then when those field hospitals closed virtually unused, instead of lifting restrictions and celebrating Covid wasn’t as bad as predicted, society decided to double down on the mitigations and continue them for two years.
Then when those field hospitals closed virtually unused, instead of lifting restrictions and celebrating Covid wasn’t as bad as predicted, society decided to double down on the mitigations and continue them for two years.
Well, there was also the possibility of delaying catching it until after the vaccine came out, but yes, 'flatten the curve' was all the rage.
Flatten the curve was all the rage until the curve was flattened and then it was just let’s keep doing this until…
Lockdowns continued over a year after the vaccine was available
Lockdowns continued over a year after the vaccine was available
> In retro, I guess masks and lockdowns only delayed the inevitable
"Two weeks to slow the spread [while we build hospital capacity]" is what we were sold on, then it just sort of kept going and people forgot what lockdowns were meant for.
"Two weeks to slow the spread [while we build hospital capacity]" is what we were sold on, then it just sort of kept going and people forgot what lockdowns were meant for.
Isolation would be moderately effective, but the surgical procedure masks that people have been wearing are not effective against virus. N95 masks are needed for that, and they have not been available until recently.
RSV is more dangerous for young children. Putting off exposure for a couple of years should reduce the number of serious cases. It's not one of those things like chicken pox where, if you're going to get it, it's better to get it younger.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2022.8266...
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2022.8266...
My daughter was born at 29 weeks. After getting out of NICU, our neonatologist strongly recommended Palivizumab to give her by immunity as RSV for premies is bad news. The catch is that insurance didnt cover it and it cost about 1300 SGD per dose.
Or maybe it’s less dangerous for older children because they were already exposed as younger children.
Immunology is really tricky because the human immune system is quite complex. These kinds of findings sadly need to be taken with a grain of salt.
Immunology is really tricky because the human immune system is quite complex. These kinds of findings sadly need to be taken with a grain of salt.
When my then 4 month-old was hospitalized with RSV last year, the medical staff told us the main issue with RSV in very young children (under 6 months) is that their respiratory system is still immature. That is, their airways are still very small and their coughs are less productive. This means that RSV symptoms that would be manageable for an older child can become potentially life threatening for the very young.
For example, if your toddler has a stuffy nose, you can help them to blow it. For an infant, you need a tool to suction their nose which can be difficult to do. That same stuffy nose might cause poor feeding and dehydration which on top of the general breathing issues caused by RSV can lead to a rapid deterioration in the infant's health.
Even with all the supportive care (oxygen, regular suctioning, a feeding tube), it took a full 5 days in the hospital for our infant to recover.
My first-hand experience with this seems to be consistent with larger trends as well. A recent CDC presentation shows that children age 0-5 months are hospitalized by RSV at far higher rates than any other age group. [1]
[1]: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-...
For example, if your toddler has a stuffy nose, you can help them to blow it. For an infant, you need a tool to suction their nose which can be difficult to do. That same stuffy nose might cause poor feeding and dehydration which on top of the general breathing issues caused by RSV can lead to a rapid deterioration in the infant's health.
Even with all the supportive care (oxygen, regular suctioning, a feeding tube), it took a full 5 days in the hospital for our infant to recover.
My first-hand experience with this seems to be consistent with larger trends as well. A recent CDC presentation shows that children age 0-5 months are hospitalized by RSV at far higher rates than any other age group. [1]
[1]: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-...
Toddlers have more robust immune systems than infants in multiple different ways. There's no evidence for your hypothesis.
Evidence with a sample size of 1: I have a pandemic toddler and a baby. Toddler was not sick once in first 18 months. Both just got RSV. Toddler was fine after a couple days. Infant was in ER and is still having effects weeks later.
Evidence with a sample size of 1: I have a pandemic toddler and a baby. Toddler was not sick once in first 18 months. Both just got RSV. Toddler was fine after a couple days. Infant was in ER and is still having effects weeks later.
If the child gets RSV right as their maternal antibodies (to RSV) start fading, it could actually be less severe. It happened with polio, though polio has much more susceptibility to antibodies circulating in the blood if all you care about is severe disease.
A child receiving maternal immunoglobulins from breast milk during the first year postpartum who is exposed to RSV might not even become noticeably ill or present as a mild cold. Nevertheless the exposure will help teach their developing immune system.
None of that is to downplay the potentially fatal seriousness of RSV. The immune system is imperfect after all. The NICU is maybe the most depressing place I’ve ever been in my life and my heart goes out for every parent who has or has had a child there or in any pediatric ICU.
None of that is to downplay the potentially fatal seriousness of RSV. The immune system is imperfect after all. The NICU is maybe the most depressing place I’ve ever been in my life and my heart goes out for every parent who has or has had a child there or in any pediatric ICU.
> Putting off exposure for a couple of years
lets lock kids in solitary confinement until it's safe to leave, good plan /s
lets lock kids in solitary confinement until it's safe to leave, good plan /s
There's a nice big middle ground between solitary confinement and doing nothing.
I'd love to see schools take a serious look at air movement and filtration.
I'd love to see schools take a serious look at air movement and filtration.
We didn't take a middle ground. Kids (the poorest and most disadvantaged) suffered a massive, irrecoverable learning loss under the mandates of public health experts.
Or maybe they were free to focus on their favorite hobbies and started a successful career. Nobody knows. Irrecoverable seems a word too extreme in any case
> Or maybe they were free to focus on their favorite hobbies and started a successful career
yea the young kids who are forming hobbies, instead of say learning to read or talk
yea the young kids who are forming hobbies, instead of say learning to read or talk
Lets not overdramatize and we will have a stronger speech.
To start, kids don't learn how to talk in the school. Not normally and if they are so young as to not being able to talk still, school is basically a convenience parking for toddlers.
We shouldn't adjust the laws to the saddest history that we can find. Treating everybody in a population as if all of them were outliers does not give the desired results.
Children are able to learn in lots of places apart of the school. Yes, is a fact. They can learn a lot for example from their grandpas and grandma. Of course, as long as their grandparents are alive because they were smarter than the fake news and the 'magufo' crew.
To start, kids don't learn how to talk in the school. Not normally and if they are so young as to not being able to talk still, school is basically a convenience parking for toddlers.
We shouldn't adjust the laws to the saddest history that we can find. Treating everybody in a population as if all of them were outliers does not give the desired results.
Children are able to learn in lots of places apart of the school. Yes, is a fact. They can learn a lot for example from their grandpas and grandma. Of course, as long as their grandparents are alive because they were smarter than the fake news and the 'magufo' crew.
We have plenty of numbers now that show the effects of lockdown on kids.
The effects are especially clear for the disadvantaged who struggled before.
The effects are especially clear for the disadvantaged who struggled before.
And all of this could easily have been predicted. Maybe people pointed it out, even. Sadly they were deplatformed, mocked, called “grandma killers” and kicked out of the conversation.
> Or maybe they were free to focus on their favorite hobbies and started a successful career.
Kinda hard to do if you are trapped at home with an abusive family. For many kids school is not just education but a sanctuary from a broken home.
It takes a lot of privilege to support closing schools for any duration of time—especially two years.
Kinda hard to do if you are trapped at home with an abusive family. For many kids school is not just education but a sanctuary from a broken home.
It takes a lot of privilege to support closing schools for any duration of time—especially two years.
We absolutely took a middle ground. Schools could've stayed closed much longer, masks could've been required much longer, vaccines could've been made mandatory. We prioritized cleaning over ventilation, to our severe detriment.
Deeming it "irrecoverable" requires a time machine; one of the most frustrating parts about dealing with child development is the impacts take decades to sort out, in sometimes surprising fashion.
Deeming it "irrecoverable" requires a time machine; one of the most frustrating parts about dealing with child development is the impacts take decades to sort out, in sometimes surprising fashion.
> We absolutely took a middle ground.
Europe apparently operated a lot less draconian wrt schools, never really closed down & things worked out pretty well. The science was pretty clear even from early on but democrats in US said georgia reopening schools was "an exercise in human sacrifice." You don't need a middle ground for the least vulnerable age-range for covid.
> Deeming it "irrecoverable" requires a time machine
what? it's irrecoverable because you never get back lost time, the past is settled and kids lost out on crucial brain development windows
Europe apparently operated a lot less draconian wrt schools, never really closed down & things worked out pretty well. The science was pretty clear even from early on but democrats in US said georgia reopening schools was "an exercise in human sacrifice." You don't need a middle ground for the least vulnerable age-range for covid.
> Deeming it "irrecoverable" requires a time machine
what? it's irrecoverable because you never get back lost time, the past is settled and kids lost out on crucial brain development windows
> Europe apparently operated a lot less draconian wrt schools, never really closed down & things worked out pretty well.
I certainly would've preferred this; here we kept the bars open, but closed the schools. Both are middle grounds, I preferred Europe's prioritization. At the time these decisions were being made, some folks talked about R0 being like a budget - you want it under one, and each mitigation gets you part of the way there. I was disappointed to see the US prioritize economy over kids; much of the world made the opposite choice, and provided more income supports to keep kids in school.
> You don't need a middle ground for the least vulnerable age-range for covid.
This would be a great point if kids lived alone, with no vulnerable folks at home.
> it's irrecoverable because you never get back lost time
People recover from lost time frequently. If your teacher is sick and you have a substitute teacher for a couple days, that time gets made up. There's summer school, enrichment programs, etc. Very little of what kids learn in school has to be learned in one specific set of months; there's a pretty large range in exact ages within a single grade, even.
It'll be years, maybe decades before we know how plastic child development is in this regard. Right now, there are massive unknowns in evaluating all of this.
I certainly would've preferred this; here we kept the bars open, but closed the schools. Both are middle grounds, I preferred Europe's prioritization. At the time these decisions were being made, some folks talked about R0 being like a budget - you want it under one, and each mitigation gets you part of the way there. I was disappointed to see the US prioritize economy over kids; much of the world made the opposite choice, and provided more income supports to keep kids in school.
> You don't need a middle ground for the least vulnerable age-range for covid.
This would be a great point if kids lived alone, with no vulnerable folks at home.
> it's irrecoverable because you never get back lost time
People recover from lost time frequently. If your teacher is sick and you have a substitute teacher for a couple days, that time gets made up. There's summer school, enrichment programs, etc. Very little of what kids learn in school has to be learned in one specific set of months; there's a pretty large range in exact ages within a single grade, even.
It'll be years, maybe decades before we know how plastic child development is in this regard. Right now, there are massive unknowns in evaluating all of this.
> People recover from lost time frequently.
Nope. They fall behind and don't catch up. https://www.edweek.org/education/students-who-struggle-early...
Nope. They fall behind and don't catch up. https://www.edweek.org/education/students-who-struggle-early...
[deleted]
That seems to be a problem in other areas as well, such as wildfires.
Good point.
This shouldn't be surprising. The economy, forestry, and healthcare are all examples of government intervention that introduces artificial distortions that make a situation worse than it otherwise would have been had natural balances been allowed to proceed without those artificial distortions.
They're also examples of places where a lack of government intervention can be harmful.
Wildfires are a problem in part because people, left to their own devices, build in places they probably shouldn't have. (Or plant eucalyptus in California. Whoops.)
Healthcare, unregulated, is where we get the term "snake oil salesman" and cocaine-based panaceas from; most of the places with more regulation of healthcare than the US like Europe have both cheaper healthcare and similar health outcomes. An entirely unregulated economy gets you something more like Somalia and Afghanistan's. etc. etc. etc.
Wildfires are a problem in part because people, left to their own devices, build in places they probably shouldn't have. (Or plant eucalyptus in California. Whoops.)
Healthcare, unregulated, is where we get the term "snake oil salesman" and cocaine-based panaceas from; most of the places with more regulation of healthcare than the US like Europe have both cheaper healthcare and similar health outcomes. An entirely unregulated economy gets you something more like Somalia and Afghanistan's. etc. etc. etc.
I would be all for cocaine-based panaceas.
Any intervention system can be used as an example for why you should intervene. Just as any intervention system can be used as an example for why you should not.
Life is a delicate balance in all things.
> Normally, children get infected by their second birthday. Now, “you’re going to end up having kids that are three, four years of age right now who have never seen RSV”.
In an ideal world, we'd vaccinate children against RSV. Acquiring immunity by suffering through an actual infection is always, always worse than acquiring it by a vaccine. About 100k children die from RSV each year!
Thankfully, there are vaccines in the pipeline [1], and I seriously hope that mRNA technology will increase both the development speed and the availability of vaccines in general.
[1] https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...
In an ideal world, we'd vaccinate children against RSV. Acquiring immunity by suffering through an actual infection is always, always worse than acquiring it by a vaccine. About 100k children die from RSV each year!
Thankfully, there are vaccines in the pipeline [1], and I seriously hope that mRNA technology will increase both the development speed and the availability of vaccines in general.
[1] https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...
Sanofi have just today announced a clinical trial for a new RSV vaccine https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-63572228.amp
> Acquiring immunity by suffering through an actual infection is always, always worse than acquiring it by a vaccine.
I mean, yes, but only because that's one of our criteria for approving a new vaccine.
I mean, yes, but only because that's one of our criteria for approving a new vaccine.
> Acquiring immunity by suffering through an actual infection is always, always worse than acquiring it by a vaccine
say that to the whoever ends up coming down with narcolepsy, thrombocytopenia, acute peri/myo-carditis, shingles reactivation, etc.
say that to the whoever ends up coming down with narcolepsy, thrombocytopenia, acute peri/myo-carditis, shingles reactivation, etc.
We've had a lot of shingles cases the last year because of immune system damage caused by Covid. What are you even talking about?
He's talking about adverse events following covid vaccination.
For example, see: "The Incidence of Myocarditis and Pericarditis in Post COVID-19 Unvaccinated Patients-A Large Population-Based Study"
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35456309/
Above-normal levels of myocarditis and pericarditis were associated with vaccination (Pfizer has been used in Israel where the study originates) but not with covid-19 infection.
For example, see: "The Incidence of Myocarditis and Pericarditis in Post COVID-19 Unvaccinated Patients-A Large Population-Based Study"
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35456309/
Above-normal levels of myocarditis and pericarditis were associated with vaccination (Pfizer has been used in Israel where the study originates) but not with covid-19 infection.
> Above-normal levels of myocarditis and pericarditis were associated with vaccination (Pfizer has been used in Israel where the study originates) but not with covid-19 infection.
Studies in the UK [1] and US [2] have shown that while, yes, there is an increased risk for myocarditis in vaccinated people, the risk of myocarditis in infected people is way higher.
[1] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA....
[2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34341797/
Studies in the UK [1] and US [2] have shown that while, yes, there is an increased risk for myocarditis in vaccinated people, the risk of myocarditis in infected people is way higher.
[1] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA....
[2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34341797/
From the Methods section of the Patone paper (your first link): "A self-controlled case series study of people ages 13 years or older vaccinated for COVID-19 in England between December 1, 2020, and December 15, 2021 [...]"
In other words, all of the participants received covid vaccines.
The second paper you've linked studied unvaccinated persons (mRNA-vax recipients were specifically excluded) and its claim of higher rates of myocarditis for covid infection is based other researchers' values of myocarditis incidence post-vax and, as alluded to in the Discussion section, skewed by relatively low 2nd-shot uptake among the American participants (myocarditis risk associated with mRNA shots goes up with each successive dose).
The Israeli paper looks at myocarditis in persons before the vaccines became available (March 2020) and then afterwards. In Israel, 2nd shot and further shot uptake was much higher than in many other places.
In other words, all of the participants received covid vaccines.
The second paper you've linked studied unvaccinated persons (mRNA-vax recipients were specifically excluded) and its claim of higher rates of myocarditis for covid infection is based other researchers' values of myocarditis incidence post-vax and, as alluded to in the Discussion section, skewed by relatively low 2nd-shot uptake among the American participants (myocarditis risk associated with mRNA shots goes up with each successive dose).
The Israeli paper looks at myocarditis in persons before the vaccines became available (March 2020) and then afterwards. In Israel, 2nd shot and further shot uptake was much higher than in many other places.
The good news is that everyone who was vaccinated also got COVID
Those studies you reference conflict with each other. The second isn't peer-reviewed.
From the first one, it actually says for men younger than 40, myocarditis is actually higher in vaccinated, whereas for women it's similar to infection:
"In men younger than 40 years old, the number of excess myocarditis events per million people was higher after a second dose of mRNA-1273 than after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test (97 [95% CI, 91–99] versus 16 [95% CI, 12–18]). In women younger than 40 years, the number of excess events per million was similar after a second dose of mRNA-1273 and a positive test (7 [95% CI, 1–9] versus 8 [95% CI, 6–8])."
That supports my belief that vaccination should be voluntary for everyone but especially young people.
From the first one, it actually says for men younger than 40, myocarditis is actually higher in vaccinated, whereas for women it's similar to infection:
"In men younger than 40 years old, the number of excess myocarditis events per million people was higher after a second dose of mRNA-1273 than after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test (97 [95% CI, 91–99] versus 16 [95% CI, 12–18]). In women younger than 40 years, the number of excess events per million was similar after a second dose of mRNA-1273 and a positive test (7 [95% CI, 1–9] versus 8 [95% CI, 6–8])."
That supports my belief that vaccination should be voluntary for everyone but especially young people.
Here's another one, published in Nature Medicine: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0
I haven't read it beyond the abstract.
We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273. This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test.
I haven't read it beyond the abstract.
We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273. This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test.
HarryHirsch(1)
If you take an intramuscular injection without aspirating the needle to make sure it's not found a blood vessel in the deltoid, you risk cardiovascular damage pointlessly. The standard of practice is so absurd and flawed yet its going to take years longer before people like you become aware of how badly we've been mislead.
One mouse study found that vaccine injection without aspiration did significantly increase the risk of adverse cardiac events. That research hasn't been reproduced in humans but this area deserves further investigation. At least early in the pandemic, US healthcare providers weren't routinely aspirating.
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab941
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43440-022-00361-4
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-141119
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab941
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43440-022-00361-4
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-141119
> At least early in the pandemic, US healthcare providers weren't routinely aspirating.
... What? Here in Germany, that's like one of the basic things that people who deal with needles on anything alive learn.
... What? Here in Germany, that's like one of the basic things that people who deal with needles on anything alive learn.
yea it doesn't happen much at all in the US, tons of normal ppl were hired to inject people and AFAIK that was never really part of instruction
I don't know the injection practices in Germany. The WHO and US CDC no longer recommend aspiration prior to intramuscular injection, mainly over pain management concerns. (I'm not claiming this is a good idea, just pointing out the current injection protocol.)
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/general-recs/admi...
In practice there is a wide variance between US healthcare providers depending on where they work and how they were trained. Some aspirate, some don't, some try but use the wrong technique.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/general-recs/admi...
In practice there is a wide variance between US healthcare providers depending on where they work and how they were trained. Some aspirate, some don't, some try but use the wrong technique.
This particular medical error scenario has been identified quickly with the covid vaccines and staff has been warned and trained.
Someone who discusses Covid vaccination complications must also discuss Covid complications. It's well established that Covid is a vascular disease, and the risk of stroke is significantly increased in the year after a Covid infection. Anecdotally, my mother-in-law's dementia got much worse after she caught Covid. That stuff is nothing that I want, and the Covid minimizers encourage the spread of a dangerous infectious disease.
The covid vaccinations in wide use now (e.g. the mRNA-based shots, adenovirus-vector shots, and the Novavax protein-based shots) either cause your own cells to create or directly insert modified versions of covid spike systems into a person's circulatory system. The biodistribution study conducted by Pfizer for the Japanese government (using LNPs with a non-mRNA payload) showed that the LNPs did not all remain at the injection site but rather spread far and wide throughout the body and accumulated in particular organs.
You have my sincere sympathy with regards to your mother-in-law's condition.
I have heard similar and worse anecdotes in which covid vaccines (especially boosters i.e. nth shots) have been the culprits and seen some severe adverse reactions in close acquaintances.
You have my sincere sympathy with regards to your mother-in-law's condition.
I have heard similar and worse anecdotes in which covid vaccines (especially boosters i.e. nth shots) have been the culprits and seen some severe adverse reactions in close acquaintances.
Was your mother in law vaccinated? If so then how do we tell if that or the disease caused the damage. It could even be some kind of synergy between them, like ADE.
My in-laws are on the conspiracy theory spectrum and not vaccinated. Sorry to bust a hole in your theory.
That seems reasonable. Would you also agree to discuss COVID vaccine complications when discussing COVID infection complications?
I'm talking about any adverse event, like with the swine flu vaccine from the 2000s, for example, where people came down with narcolepsy. Then there's the swine flu vaccine from the 70s that caused GBS. It's just clear to me that saying "it's always better compared to infection" is just a lie. For the overwhelming majority, sure, but for enough people it's life-altering if not life-ending.
> For the overwhelming majority, sure, but for enough people it's life-altering if not life-ending.
I do not deny that vaccines can cause adverse effects - but outside of vaccine trials and Army experimental vaccines, the rate of adverse effects is vastly lower than the rate of the same adverse effect that people experience who get infected.
I do not deny that vaccines can cause adverse effects - but outside of vaccine trials and Army experimental vaccines, the rate of adverse effects is vastly lower than the rate of the same adverse effect that people experience who get infected.
I had a family member come down with shingles shortly after getting boosted, hasn't been infected with covid in years.
There's enough discussion about this happening after vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34579250/
"Conclusion: This study indicates that the occurrence of VZV reactivation is clinically relevant. However, our findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination is safe, and remains strongly recommended." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35931613/
Of course there's the obligatory, robotic, throat-clearing that vaccines should still be taken even when they find evidence of a side-effect.
There's enough discussion about this happening after vaccination: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34579250/
"Conclusion: This study indicates that the occurrence of VZV reactivation is clinically relevant. However, our findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination is safe, and remains strongly recommended." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35931613/
Of course there's the obligatory, robotic, throat-clearing that vaccines should still be taken even when they find evidence of a side-effect.
> I had a family member come down with shingles shortly after getting boosted, hasn't been infected with covid in years.
Covid has only been around for a couple of years.
Covid has only been around for a couple of years.
Intuitively it sounds nice but I haven't seen any actual evidence that this is what's happening. It seems a lot like the story that kids don't get COVID, a feel-good story but not really based on anything but hopeful speculation.
> like the story that kids don't get COVID
What story is that? Are you sure you aren't misparaphrasing the fact that kids are not susceptible to severe outcomes?
What story is that? Are you sure you aren't misparaphrasing the fact that kids are not susceptible to severe outcomes?
It was a common dis-information campaign until reality hit so hard that nobody could possibly support the idea: https://fullfact.org/health/children-can-get-coronavirus/
Kids are at significantly less risk of severe illness from covid than from influenza. This is well-known (see https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34107134/ for example).
I remember when the CDC quietly subtracted more than 72k alleged covid deaths, including some alleged pediatric covid deaths, from the tally and blamed a "coding error": https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/24/cdc-coding-err...
I remember when the CDC quietly subtracted more than 72k alleged covid deaths, including some alleged pediatric covid deaths, from the tally and blamed a "coding error": https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/24/cdc-coding-err...
This is patently absurd to say a disease that causes bad outcomes for 2 in a million should recieve a drug that causes bad outcomes for millions. Keep it up! Are you an insider too?
What do your fact checkers say about the leading cause of death in Canada?
What do your fact checkers say about the leading cause of death in Canada?
Yes, it was repeat messaging from the presidents on down.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22kids+don%27t+catch+covid%...
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22kids+don%27t+catch+covid%...
Does it bother anyone else when large publications leave spelling mistakes or incomplete sentences in an article? It seems to be occuring more often. In this case, the first sentence of the subtitle: 'COVID-19 restrictions mean we are more susceptible these viruses'. Proof read just once, and you realise a word is missing.
Oh, it bothers the heck out of me. I assume the calculus they did was that it's cheaper to lay off most of the editors and fact checkers, and it won't make much difference to the bottom line, since most people don't even read the text of the article anyway. Just make sure the headline is punchy and you'll get those precious clicks.
Read newton and einsteins famous papers and it'll bother you less
Reputable publications generally employ editors. An author’s primary job is not to output flawless language. An editor’s is.
Didn’t realize they were employed to write.
You don’t even need to manually proof read.. how these publications don’t require a once-through with something like grammarly is astounding to me.
Heh, two sides of a coin I guess. I see a lot of HNers denounce Grammarly as a keylogger, and that 'no one should use it'.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+...
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+...
It does not have to be Grammarly. LanguageTool has been around for more than 15 years and it works offline.
A great, non-spyware alternative: https://www.antidote.info/en/
[deleted]
It's what we get since we don't pay for news en masse.
Just curious what peoples thoughts are on whole house ionizer’s that attach to the furnace. Just got an inspection and mentioned we recently had our ducts cleaned as our youngest has mild Asthma and I have mild allergies. The duct cleaning has kept our filter super clean over the last 6 months but I asked what else I could do. Long story short got a ionizer on sale but after seeing it installed and it’s relatively small size feeling like it might be kinda scammy. It’s a plasma air air purifier and I looked them up and have good reviews, but without actually testing the air before and after not sure how to prove it does anything. Sorry I know it’s a tad off topic but kinda related since one of the claims is ‘ Plasma Air significantly reduces airborne pollutants commonly found in homes such as bacteria and viruses, mold spores, odors, chemicals from paint, varnish and cleaning agents, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and even cancer-causing formaldehyde emitted from furniture’. Cheers and thanks for any feedback.
An Investigation of Ozone Emissions From Consumer Products: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/ozone-emissions...
Ozone Generators that are Sold as Air Cleaners : https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/ozone-generators-...
Ideally, don't use ozone-generating or other gimmicky devices. Ventilate the space instead. Usually, unless there is a high pollution event or it is peak allergy season, the air outside is lower in contaminants than indoor air.
Vacuum frequently using a machine with a HEPA filter and run your home's air circulation system with a MERV13 filter, or get/make an air filter. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw7fUMhNov8)
If you feel you must use an ozone generating device, don't use it if the spaces are occupied and ventilate them thoroughly before occupying them again.
Definitely don't use them along with other cleaning/deodorizing chemicals, as the result of mixing those with ozone is complex and poorly understood.
Ozone Generators that are Sold as Air Cleaners : https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/ozone-generators-...
Ideally, don't use ozone-generating or other gimmicky devices. Ventilate the space instead. Usually, unless there is a high pollution event or it is peak allergy season, the air outside is lower in contaminants than indoor air.
Vacuum frequently using a machine with a HEPA filter and run your home's air circulation system with a MERV13 filter, or get/make an air filter. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw7fUMhNov8)
If you feel you must use an ozone generating device, don't use it if the spaces are occupied and ventilate them thoroughly before occupying them again.
Definitely don't use them along with other cleaning/deodorizing chemicals, as the result of mixing those with ozone is complex and poorly understood.
Thank you for the info. Man now I second guessing that impulse buy. Going to read up and maybe even have them remove it. Tech was a good salesman and made me feel like I was helping my family, while I might have done the exact opposite. Glad I asked, and glad you took the time to inform me.
The Home Performance YT channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/homeperformance) is a good resource also. It's a couple who have become experts in practical home air quality management.
Get a MERV16 filter for your furnace and you'll have amazingly clean air. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Mean-PM-25-removal-effic...
The higher the # the more restricted the air flow is, which is harder for the fan to work with. This may be an issue if the fan is not very good.
It is not true though that the air will become amazingly clear based on the presence of the filter. I used a 11 for a long time and it certainly didn't stop everything from getting covered in dust anyway. My place is not airtight.
It is not true though that the air will become amazingly clear based on the presence of the filter. I used a 11 for a long time and it certainly didn't stop everything from getting covered in dust anyway. My place is not airtight.
Everyone says this, but it's not true for the newer filters which use electrostatic attraction to filter the smaller particles.
A dirty filter (do you know how many people don't ever change their filter?) will put far more load on a blower than a better filter.
A MERV11 is significantly less effective, and wouldn't affect dust production anyway since it is created mostly by your skin, clothing fibers, etc.
During the California wildfires I bought several air sensors and placed them around my house and experimented with different filters. a MERV16 with a carbon layer reduced VOCs, PM2.5, etc all down to extremely low levels in every room.
A dirty filter (do you know how many people don't ever change their filter?) will put far more load on a blower than a better filter.
A MERV11 is significantly less effective, and wouldn't affect dust production anyway since it is created mostly by your skin, clothing fibers, etc.
During the California wildfires I bought several air sensors and placed them around my house and experimented with different filters. a MERV16 with a carbon layer reduced VOCs, PM2.5, etc all down to extremely low levels in every room.
One caveat on this - most residential systems don't have fans that are designed to go up to MERV16.
High MERV ratings put more load on the blower equipment.
High MERV ratings put more load on the blower equipment.
The fans aren't "designed" for MERV16, but most are very capable of supporting them. I'm not sure how this misconception got hold that it's significantly bad to use higher grade filters. See my other comment - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33550653
It also produces ozone which is not great to be breathing. UV-C is more effective than plasma but still produces some nontrivial ozone if it's bright enough to be disinfecting air.
Thank you did not do much research just took the techs word as he told me about all the courses he took and how great they are.
I used to sell similar home products -- if it's similar to my experience, those "courses" are given by the manufacturer, and really, they're just tutorials for their dealers on how to sell/install/use the product. They're not academic in nature, but telling the customer you've taken "courses" on the subject makes them feel quite compelled to trust you.
As others have pointed out the issues with ozone generators, I'll just throw ERVs as a ventilation option into the mix. An ERV with a filter can cycle out not just particles, bacteria, and viruses, but also dangerous gases.
Ozone is not good for you or a lot of materials in your house, get a good filter for the intake instead.
A high MERV filter will remove bacteria/viruses as well as a bunch of other stuff.
A high MERV filter will remove bacteria/viruses as well as a bunch of other stuff.
Surprised reading "immunity debt" after seeing this
https://twitter.com/unbiasedscipod/status/158891593499112652...
https://nitter.net/unbiasedscipod/status/1588915934991126529
https://twitter.com/unbiasedscipod/status/158891593499112652...
https://nitter.net/unbiasedscipod/status/1588915934991126529
May be relevant:
https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1588886664612818945
https://nitter.net/apsmunro/status/1588886664612818945
https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1588886664612818945
https://nitter.net/apsmunro/status/1588886664612818945
The citation linked is flagged as "editorial", and the abstract says "may be". Anyone got a link to the full pub?
These are scenarios where I really want an expert to summarize the current state of what's known rather than trying to figure it out from a PubMed search, especially when there seem to be competing opinions.
These are scenarios where I really want an expert to summarize the current state of what's known rather than trying to figure it out from a PubMed search, especially when there seem to be competing opinions.
This is exactly why we need a more in-depth approach when explaining things to the general population. The whole chain of deductions should be presented and easily verifiable, otherwise it's quite easy for a layman like me to get into a situation where I see two opposite but equally-plausible-sounding claims made by "experts", but no way to figure out who's right, because nobody is presenting any proof, just relying on their own "I'm an expert" authority.
I'm tired of everyone being an "expert". A true expert should have no problem presenting proof to their claims.
I'm tired of everyone being an "expert". A true expert should have no problem presenting proof to their claims.
She's talking about the strength of an individual's immune system. She doesn't seem to be talking about herd immunity or how the pandemic has potentially changed population dynamics.
For example, "debt" could be referring to the fact that many people might've already gotten [insert infection name here] over the last couple of years, but they did not, and now there's an increased number of people who don't have immunity to it compared to a world where there not been a pandemic. The fact that this was ignored almost seems misleading given that she claims to be an immunologist.
For example, "debt" could be referring to the fact that many people might've already gotten [insert infection name here] over the last couple of years, but they did not, and now there's an increased number of people who don't have immunity to it compared to a world where there not been a pandemic. The fact that this was ignored almost seems misleading given that she claims to be an immunologist.
Ummm... this doesn't sound like they are describing the same thing. No one is arguing that our immune systems have "shut down". The argument is that the immune system hasn't been keeping up on exposures.
I know next to nothing about this area. However, I have an immunologist next to me that says it actually is a thing and a phrased used in literature. I hate the internet sometimes.
My own anecdotes:
- I have a ~20-month-old in daycare. He brings something home every couple weeks. This is our first child so I have no idea if this is normal or unique to this time period.
- Coworkers with children seem to be dealing with a lot more "wow that wiped us out for a week" type of symptoms versus the typical "sniffles and sore throat" symptoms associated with the common cold.
- I have had two cold/flu type bugs this year (not COVID, confirmed by at-home tests) that put me on my ass for a few days. I haven't had that happen in 10+ years.
Extra context: I am vaccinated for COVID, yet I still had COVID this past year. COVID was mild, mostly achy/headache-y that lasted about 2 days. No breathing issues or loss of smell/taste. I attribute that to the vaccination. I did not get my flu shot yet this year but am planning to do so.
Stay safe out there, friends.
- I have a ~20-month-old in daycare. He brings something home every couple weeks. This is our first child so I have no idea if this is normal or unique to this time period.
- Coworkers with children seem to be dealing with a lot more "wow that wiped us out for a week" type of symptoms versus the typical "sniffles and sore throat" symptoms associated with the common cold.
- I have had two cold/flu type bugs this year (not COVID, confirmed by at-home tests) that put me on my ass for a few days. I haven't had that happen in 10+ years.
Extra context: I am vaccinated for COVID, yet I still had COVID this past year. COVID was mild, mostly achy/headache-y that lasted about 2 days. No breathing issues or loss of smell/taste. I attribute that to the vaccination. I did not get my flu shot yet this year but am planning to do so.
Stay safe out there, friends.
Anecdotally experienced similar: tested negative for covid so assuming it was flu unless it was a false reading of course. Worse illness I’ve had in over a decade. Lasted about 5 weeks from start to finish unless the lingering cough and tiredness was a secondary infection.
Perfectly normal I'm afraid. My 3 year old managed to go the entire summer without a cold which was great progress. As soon as the weather changed, she got sick again.
One thing that people fail to mention about being a parent is that you still have to be a parent even when you're sick as a dog. Baby still has to get changed and the toddlers still have to get fed even if you can barely lift your head. I swear, being a parent is like having super powers. Pre-kiddos me could never have done these feats under these conditions.
1. Normal
2. You also have a kid and have more co-worker kid talk, so that's just something you wouldn't be aware of before
3. You've been getting less sleep as a new parent and you've also got a little petri dish living in your house now.
2. You also have a kid and have more co-worker kid talk, so that's just something you wouldn't be aware of before
3. You've been getting less sleep as a new parent and you've also got a little petri dish living in your house now.
Quite normal. If it's any consolation, it's only for the first year or two. Their immune systems improve quickly.
I still wear masks indoors (N95). Haven't gotten sick in 3 years. (I also try to exercise, get vitamin D, balanced diet, I'm 38, yadda yadda, so it's not just the mask obvs, but I used to get sick every year) I've also decided to work remote for the rest of my life, which helps a lot I think.
counterpoint: several flu variants were extinguished by social distancing etc.
https://www.statnews.com/2021/06/02/pandemic-upside-flu-viru...
2 steps forward, 1 step back.
https://www.statnews.com/2021/06/02/pandemic-upside-flu-viru...
2 steps forward, 1 step back.
It's interesting that it took this long to report on this. Kids have been getting hammered for weeks. Most pediatric units in the Chicago area disappeared in the last 2 years, and doctors are getting creative finding beds for kids.
There's something that's just not sexy about RSV - it's far more dangerous to children than COVID is, yet there's hardly any coverage. If this many kids were getting COVID, I would wager we'd be seeing a high volume of alarmist coverage.
There's something that's just not sexy about RSV - it's far more dangerous to children than COVID is, yet there's hardly any coverage. If this many kids were getting COVID, I would wager we'd be seeing a high volume of alarmist coverage.
RSV was never going to kill anywhere near as many people as COVID did.
There probably are this many kids getting COVID.
There probably are this many kids getting COVID.
Fast reporting risks bad information, and we've seen how that goes.
Reporting on the facts can go quickly, but reporting that includes recommendations and impacts gets really risky as we now know.
Reporting on the facts can go quickly, but reporting that includes recommendations and impacts gets really risky as we now know.
Maybe they don’t want to start another panic? Let our economy and our souls heal a bit?
That many kids are getting COVID-19. But COVID-19 was never a significant risk for otherwise healthy children. It's literally just a cold, very similar in effects to the other 4 endemic human coronaviruses.
Yes, there have been a few cases where healthy children suffered serious symptoms but the absolute numbers are tiny.
Yes, there have been a few cases where healthy children suffered serious symptoms but the absolute numbers are tiny.
completely untrue, kids under 6 months have high hospitalization according to the cdc
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7145a3.htm?s_cid=mm...
> Among 473 infants aged <6 months hospitalized during the Omicron BA.2/BA.5 variant-predominant period, 397 (84%) had COVID-19–related symptoms. Among all 473 infants, 174 (38%) were aged <1 month; 69 (39%) of these were birth hospitalizations (Table 2). Among infants who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result during the birth hospitalization, 60 (87%) were asymptomatic
84% of all hospitalizations for <6 months seems less than ideal.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7145a3.htm?s_cid=mm...
> Among 473 infants aged <6 months hospitalized during the Omicron BA.2/BA.5 variant-predominant period, 397 (84%) had COVID-19–related symptoms. Among all 473 infants, 174 (38%) were aged <1 month; 69 (39%) of these were birth hospitalizations (Table 2). Among infants who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result during the birth hospitalization, 60 (87%) were asymptomatic
84% of all hospitalizations for <6 months seems less than ideal.
You are misinterpreting that report. The absolute risk of hospitalization in that population is tiny once you account for the huge number of infections.
ok, i love covid now
I suspect a lot of these flus are Covid... I just got Covid recently, but I only felt ill for maybe two days. I only tested myself because I'm in a choir that requires testing for certain rehearsals, otherwise I would have figured it's "the flu" or something. The guy I sat next to this week said he had a similar illness a few weeks ago, but he didn't test himself and attributed it to a random cold (but was surprised he's had lingering symptoms).
From my experience if someone under the age of 50 has mild cold like symptoms or as you did only feels ill for about two days then the chance of it being COVID is IMHO higher than the flu. I think in young people the flu hits you much harder and you never get away with less than a week minimum of feeling ill but with COVID one could have no symptoms or mild symptoms for less than a week which is very common.
You're probably right - I think a lot of people have a fundamental misunderstanding of severity and statistics here. As far as I can tell, if you have respiratory "cold"/"flu" symptoms, it's most likely that it's COVID, just based on prevalence and contagiousness.
Also, a lot of people haven't had the flu in years - it's not mild. It's often a week of being miserable in bed, not two days of sniffles. Mild COVID can feel like a cold, but COVID is more contagious and (I believe) more prevalent at this point. If you have any of those symptoms, you should probably assume it is COVID and take a test if you need to be around others.
Also, a lot of people haven't had the flu in years - it's not mild. It's often a week of being miserable in bed, not two days of sniffles. Mild COVID can feel like a cold, but COVID is more contagious and (I believe) more prevalent at this point. If you have any of those symptoms, you should probably assume it is COVID and take a test if you need to be around others.
People say this and I cannot fathom it. I just tested positive for flu last week. Yes I took one day off work. Yes I had a fever. But I kept working and other than isolating, lived my life as normal. If you're stuck in bed for a week I would seriously consider your health. Flu was one day of high fever and a few days of sniffles and this is confirmed influenza. Seriously Americans are way too unhealthy. Even COVID... Everyone said it was a week and I had one day of high fever (but I didd take my free week off works that was great!)
I'd like to see more data on this. Just looking at CDC reports, it seems that influenza from May 2022 to Oct 2022 is just tracking the normal winter high, summer low pattern:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/WeeklyArchives2022-2023/WHONP...
Going back to the 2021 year, that's where the pattern returns to normal, i.e. early 2021 had very few positive influenza tests, but then it starts climbing again in late 2021 (Nov 2021 report):
https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/111914
Interestingly, rates of co-infection (COVID + flu) seem to be all over the place, this study found a ~50% coinfection rate in 2021-2022 (others are much lower, maybe people with Covid were not also being tested for flu?
https://medicine.missouri.edu/news/study-finds-high-prevalen...
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/WeeklyArchives2022-2023/WHONP...
Going back to the 2021 year, that's where the pattern returns to normal, i.e. early 2021 had very few positive influenza tests, but then it starts climbing again in late 2021 (Nov 2021 report):
https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/111914
Interestingly, rates of co-infection (COVID + flu) seem to be all over the place, this study found a ~50% coinfection rate in 2021-2022 (others are much lower, maybe people with Covid were not also being tested for flu?
https://medicine.missouri.edu/news/study-finds-high-prevalen...
[deleted]
Can confirm. Started feeling a bit ill last Monday, then it was like all hell has broken loose, next Monday it will be two weeks and I'm still not feeling 100% back.
Thought it was just me! I'm really usually pretty healthy, but a few back to back colds is unusual.
+1. My wife and I have had lingering respiratory symptoms and sinus issues off and on for a month now. Tested negative for flu and COVID. Definitely some bad stuff going around right now.
People keep blaming reasonable medical practices instead of, you know, several years of global, immense stress? That has a definite effect on immune health. We KNOW that huge numbers of people are needing mental health treatment, so much so that it has basically overwhelmed the mental health sector, but we just ignore that when discussing why people are getting sick right now with relatively low interactivity things?
Yes, my friend's daughter who just now in the first grade has been sick all school year. She was not put into daycare pre-covid and did online kindergarten after that. Her latest infection has been bacterial based which has another twist. Apparently so many kids are getting bacterial infections, that Amoxicillin is now in short supply. The doctors had to prescribe her a cephalosporin as an alternative.
While I don't doubt for a second that there was pent up exposures with schools being closed, I also have to imagine parents are being much more responsive to symptoms. Maybe the cases on the margin that would never have resulted in hospitalizations in years previously are ending up there, if for no other reason than a lot of parents simply have no experience with their kids being sick.
Get your flu shot, and a bivalent covid booster.
I have some issues with this logic. My oldest daughter spent essentially her whole first 2.5 years in a pretty closed social circle, because she wasn't in day care. When she started preschool at age 4, by this logic, shouldn't she have been susceptible to these severe infections?
I don't think her situation is all that uncommon. Not every kid went straight to daycare prepandemic. Is there any evidence that children with relatively closed social groups get these severe symptoms when they do get exposed?
I don't have a great answer for what is going on, if not this "immunity debt" thing. It just seems a bit flimsy to me.
For what it's worth, I've had ER trips for 2 of my toddlers in the past month with rhinovirus/enterovirus, the other pathogen besides RSV that's slamming toddlers currently. They both made pretty quick recoveries with prednisone for one of them and an albuterol nebulizer for the other.
I don't think her situation is all that uncommon. Not every kid went straight to daycare prepandemic. Is there any evidence that children with relatively closed social groups get these severe symptoms when they do get exposed?
I don't have a great answer for what is going on, if not this "immunity debt" thing. It just seems a bit flimsy to me.
For what it's worth, I've had ER trips for 2 of my toddlers in the past month with rhinovirus/enterovirus, the other pathogen besides RSV that's slamming toddlers currently. They both made pretty quick recoveries with prednisone for one of them and an albuterol nebulizer for the other.
Preventative care can be the most effective (yes according to science based on research on all cause mortality)
Cold showers, don’t drink too much, get enough sleep, don’t stress too much, do some exercise to get the blood pumping - good recipe for health
Cold showers, don’t drink too much, get enough sleep, don’t stress too much, do some exercise to get the blood pumping - good recipe for health
Here in Germany they have an influenza monitor, that fortunately was unaffected by all the political COVID theatre. They constantly analyze random samples sent in from participating clinics to detect the prevalence of different types of virii in the population. This gives quite good data (and probably for that reason was not used during Covid).
Current data shows that influenza is back, but not yet with a vengeance. Predominant type is H3N2 and mainly children 0-4 are affected. SARS-CoV-2 only has a small share.
https://influenza.rki.de/Diagrams.aspx?agiRegion=0
Current data shows that influenza is back, but not yet with a vengeance. Predominant type is H3N2 and mainly children 0-4 are affected. SARS-CoV-2 only has a small share.
https://influenza.rki.de/Diagrams.aspx?agiRegion=0
Since November 2019 I feel like the flu is taking longer to pass, has been more annoying. And I more easily get sore throat bacterial infection, which I never had before
Also a strange cough that was not covid, since there were no other symptoms like fatigue and PCR was negative, was more annoying and lasted longer. Almost couldn't sleep. And now I keep a permanent bag of cough sugar drops at work
For some people they are. My neighbor has been sick at least 6 times this year and I've not avoided contact with her. And I am fine.
I got a flu a month ago and still struggle a bit.
Thanks for the reminder to schedule my flu shot!
[deleted]
looking forward to 5 years from now when we're still saying lockdowns (not leaving our houses for 4 weeks in 2020) are causing immunity debt.
I’m hunting tech debt at work, meanwhile there is immunity debt out there!
Seems like we need an RSV vaccine. Flu, covid, and RSV managed by vaccine would be really nice. Colds are a bit easier to handle, at least.
My kids were preemies (born last day of the second trimester) and RSV was The Big Bad for the first couple of years. They got put on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palivizumab - a vaccine would be spectacular.
It's my understanding some candidates are in trials now.
It's my understanding some candidates are in trials now.
[deleted]
sp332(10)
Two viral illnesses in one month none of them covid (at least according to the tests). The joy of having kids in school.
Our immune systems can't just "take a break" like it did during the pandemic. Its a muscle, you don't use it; it atrophies.
Simplified analogies suck... there is more and more evidence that (some) virus infections can have a damaging accumulating effect (it depends though and the biggest factor seems to be the individual). By your simplified analogy it would seem logical to expose oneself to any virus as often as someone does not "overexercise" the muscle, which is really not recommended!!! It doesn't make you stronger, it can weaken and permanetly damage you! Some things are lethal, some things are damaging, hyperhygiene especially in childhood is not good, but still hygiene is a profound reason our civilization does better in many regards.. it is a tight balance everyone needs to decide for his own (and to his own conditions).
Please don't propagate that our immune system is a muscle we need to train (in that simplified way).
Please don't propagate that our immune system is a muscle we need to train (in that simplified way).
Your immune system doesn't "take breaks", if it would you'd just die pretty quickly. The immune systems is constantly confronted to the germs in your environment and doesn't have to be actively fighting an identified disease to keep working properly. There is no such thing as "immunity debt".
The immune system seems to work in somewhat the opposite way that you suggest. There is growing evidence to support the hygiene hypothesis. Living in overly sterile environments can cause the immune system to go haywire and start attacking the body's own tissues (autoimmune disease). We co-evolved with germs, and need a constant exposure to some level of germs to stay healthy.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05349-x
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05349-x
Not exactly.
Your immune system actually never takes a break: it's continually working intensely, that's why/when you're not ill most of the time.
Case in point: your body _constantly_ gets "agressions" from bacterias, viruses, germs from the air your breathe, the things/people you touch, the scratches you make, what you eat.
When you get symptoms (a flu, a cold, whatever disease), it's because your immune system gets overwhelmed, is working even harder, has a hard time to keep up.
When you get exhausted for other reasons (not enough sleep, too much exercise, stress, etc.) your body has less energy for your immune system to work properly. This explains why you easily catch an infection you wouldn't when you're not exhausted.
Your immune system actually never takes a break: it's continually working intensely, that's why/when you're not ill most of the time.
Case in point: your body _constantly_ gets "agressions" from bacterias, viruses, germs from the air your breathe, the things/people you touch, the scratches you make, what you eat.
When you get symptoms (a flu, a cold, whatever disease), it's because your immune system gets overwhelmed, is working even harder, has a hard time to keep up.
When you get exhausted for other reasons (not enough sleep, too much exercise, stress, etc.) your body has less energy for your immune system to work properly. This explains why you easily catch an infection you wouldn't when you're not exhausted.
It's more like it "got a break" because people were quarantines, so now you haven't had the flu for 3 years it will be less likely to handle it than if you had it last year. Flu spreads primarily via bodily fluids (door knobs, touchy kids, etc) and people are now more likely to get it and a huge swathe of the population hasn't had it in a while, hence this year will likely be a bad one, along with more people who haven't had flu in a while.
Getting the flu is not a requirement for well-being. I've spent several years not getting it, then getting it once, then again not for several years.
It's a matter of preventing it (washing hands often, masking in crowded areas, ventilating rooms properly) and helping our body system to be rested/strong (getting enough sleep/rest, dressing warm, drinking enough). And of our own conditions. And luck.
Yes, immune system memory is at play, but even with the exact same virus, getting the flux in year 1 doesn't mean you'll not get it in year 2 if your body is unwell already.
Moreover, getting the flu (or any infection really) is not a small thing: it can break you down for days, weeks, months and even kill you. Best to avoid it when you can, and be happy when you avoided it.
The pseudo darwinist thing of "getting infected trains your immune system / makes you stronger" or "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is bs on the other hand.
It's a matter of preventing it (washing hands often, masking in crowded areas, ventilating rooms properly) and helping our body system to be rested/strong (getting enough sleep/rest, dressing warm, drinking enough). And of our own conditions. And luck.
Yes, immune system memory is at play, but even with the exact same virus, getting the flux in year 1 doesn't mean you'll not get it in year 2 if your body is unwell already.
Moreover, getting the flu (or any infection really) is not a small thing: it can break you down for days, weeks, months and even kill you. Best to avoid it when you can, and be happy when you avoided it.
The pseudo darwinist thing of "getting infected trains your immune system / makes you stronger" or "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is bs on the other hand.
Seems incorrect. If I don't use my fingernails why do they grow?
I guess making up analogies doesn't work....
I guess making up analogies doesn't work....
I played basketball and worked outside doing heavy labor in my adolescence and I never had to cut my nails due to them wearing away. I miss that.
Yes yes, bad analogy.
This is readily debunked by the fact that polio vaccines work long-term despite most folks having zero ongoing exposure to the antigens in question.
Each virus is unique. Polio doesn't evolve the same way cold or flu viruses do.
The claim above was "Our immune systems can't just 'take a break'... Its a muscle, you don't use it; it atrophies."
Polio disproves that conclusively.
Your explanation agrees with me here; describing it as a problem with the immune system is inaccurate. Relatively rapid immune escape is a feature of certain viruses.
Polio disproves that conclusively.
Your explanation agrees with me here; describing it as a problem with the immune system is inaccurate. Relatively rapid immune escape is a feature of certain viruses.
Polio is slow, and it has to go through the blood to cause severe disease. RSV and COVID-19 (or really SARS-CoV-2) don't. IPV can't stop transmission, and OPV has dubious long term protection from spread.
As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, RSV is more dangerous to younger children, so delaying infection is probably advantageous on a population level. I don't think there is any evidence that the severity of any of these diseases is higher when amortized over the years we had very low incidences, we are just seeing more disease total in a short period of time as restrictions are lifted.