12 ms·

Right now, this seems to be the best explanation for a lot of the unexpected observations we made so far: * few children seem to be sick from that virus * geog

Right now, this seems to be the best explanation for a lot of the unexpected observations we made so far: * few children seem to be sick from that virus * geographical disparity in Europe (compare northern Germany vs. northern Italy), even considering population density * the high number of reportedly asymptomatic cases * uneven distribution of infectiousness ("superspreaders") My pet theory so far is that one or more very similar viruses have been in circulation for a while and that "asymptomatic" carriers of COVID-19 are in fact at least partially immune due to exposure to these similar viruses. Note that this also means that COVID-19 is much scarier than it looks. Because if you are not among those with prior immunity, you are much more likely to suffer from the bad effects of that virus.

andy_ppp 6y ago
I keep wondering if the immunity to these viruses disappears while in lockdown causing a much more severe second wave than expected...
- yomly 6y ago
  Don't know why you were down voted - I take your position to mean "has lockdown led to a loss of general immunity due to lack of exposure to general pathogens" which I think is a valid question to ask. Seems some people are too trigger happy and unwilling to explore charitable interpretation of posts.
  - andy_ppp 6y ago
    Precisely, it’s not as if we don’t know from other pandemics that the second wave is almost always more severe... I’m not suggesting we go full Sweden and start coughing on each other in the sauna, but there are lots of factors we are struggling to account for in all this.
- Klinky 6y ago
  The article and your wondering doesn't provide enough evidence that we should go counter to not trying to spread the virus in the first place. Social distancing, hygiene and a vaccine are much more definitive ways to combat a severe second wave than hoping magically some people have built-in immunity or some unknown environmental trigger results in a similar immune response.
  - yomly 6y ago
    The parent never suggested anything anti-lockdown. At face value it is merely questioning the existence of a possible trade off of lockdown. As you've not provided evidence or anecdotal stories to refute the question I'm still in no better position to consider the parent's question with more information. I mean if we really want to start projecting our own agendas or anti agendas, the whole notion of "evidence" leaves a bad taste in my mouth given the WHO went on record saying "there is no evidence of human transmission". And I am saying this as a scientist! Our obsession with evidence and data is important (as what are we without empiricism) but boy has it seemed more like a curse rather than a blessing at various stages throughout this pandemic. I am definitely team Bayes on these matters, common sense and experience do hold some value sometimes.
    - Klinky 6y ago
      Germ theory and the science around vaccines is well established. Winging it because maybe some unknown might protect us sounds absurd. To get to the point where the existence of this unknown can be proven yes/no will take longer than it will to develop a vaccine.
      - yomly 6y ago
        I never questioned germ theory nor the science of vaccines. I do raise an eyebrow however when there's so much rigmarole around "evidence" and mask wearing. Just like there was rigmarole around hand washing when Semmelweis promoted it. What a bizarre hill people have made to die on. And how slow the WHO were to declare the dangers of covid in its early stages.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  It's a bad theory with no medical evidence.
- dehrmann 6y ago
  The answer is probably "we don't know." The closest example I can think of for this is what the immune systems of ISS astronauts look like after 6 months in orbit. Listening to epidemiologists alone was/is a bad choice because they study the spread of disease. You also to consider long-term effects on the immune system, the economy, education, social structure, politics. The second-order effects have already been surprising: - Social unrest in the US - China restricting freedoms in Hong Kong - Bifurcated "K" economy - Covid case surges in countries that "did it right" with hard lockdowns
gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
My pet theory is that chronic disease like obesity, combined with pre-existing immunity, and possibly some correlation to vitamin-d deficiency explains most of how this has played out. Factor in a glut of people who're living into advanced age, due to the progress of medical technology, so naturally in a precarious place against any infection. And of course, mismanagement of those people in nursing homes means guaranteed disaster. So really, I think it's much less dangerous than we've let on, but deadly to certain demographics, that happen to be larger in the West (obese, diabetic, etc.).
- Klinky 6y ago
  This doesn't pan out when children have developed severe inflammatory responses, young adults have died, and not all people with comorbidities have had severe reactions. You can't just say it's fat and/or old people who are having severe symptoms or dying.
  - jtbayly 6y ago
    It mostly does. Those cases you mention are quite rare.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    >This doesn't pan out when children have developed severe inflammatory responses, young adults have died, and not all people with comorbidities have had severe reactions How many millions has covid infected thus far? It would be concerning if it hadn't killed a couple healthy kids and not killed a couple obese old people.
    - Klinky 6y ago
      It's not "a couple", there's been about 105 child deaths, and 4600 child hospitalizations. It's not as bad as adults, but you can't say little Johnny is magically immune, nor can you say that Brad the football star at the local college is either. I don't think it's currently clear why some apparently healthy people develop severe reactions.
notatoad 6y ago
>one or more very similar viruses have been in circulation for a while the genetic makeup of covid-19 has been well studied and this is not the case. If it were multiple different diseases, it would be very obvious.
subsubzero 6y ago
I completely agree with this hypothesis, it explains why groups so disparate have all seen similar outcomes(low instances of severe covid: -homeless -celebrities -children What do all these groups have in common? Age? well count out celebrities, ie. Tom Hanks, Prince Philip(both are in advanced age). Good health? I'd count out homeless as a lot suffer from chronic ill-health. Weight? Some heavier celebrities have had covid and been fine, its an important metric though. Exposure to a lot of viruses? Yes, all three groups are in constant exposure to a multitude of viruses, from children in daycare, to celebrities interacting with tons of people to always traveling, to homeless getting exposed to viruses in trash and living in unsanitary conditions.
teorema 6y ago
I've been wondering this since the beginning, as a parent of a relatively small child in preschool. I've had one prediction all along, which is that parents of small children would probably also have lower rates of symptomatic disease, lower severity, etc. than matched controls, because they'd also be exposed to prexisting coronaviruses and therefore have some cross-immunity. You could probably extend this to other groups too. I admit it might be totally wrong but it seems straightforward to test with the right data, and if it were wrong that would also be interesting.

andy_ppp 6y ago

I keep wondering if the immunity to these viruses disappears while in lockdown causing a much more severe second wave than expected...

yomly 6y ago
Don't know why you were down voted - I take your position to mean "has lockdown led to a loss of general immunity due to lack of exposure to general pathogens" which I think is a valid question to ask. Seems some people are too trigger happy and unwilling to explore charitable interpretation of posts.
- andy_ppp 6y ago
  Precisely, it’s not as if we don’t know from other pandemics that the second wave is almost always more severe... I’m not suggesting we go full Sweden and start coughing on each other in the sauna, but there are lots of factors we are struggling to account for in all this.
Klinky 6y ago
The article and your wondering doesn't provide enough evidence that we should go counter to not trying to spread the virus in the first place. Social distancing, hygiene and a vaccine are much more definitive ways to combat a severe second wave than hoping magically some people have built-in immunity or some unknown environmental trigger results in a similar immune response.
- yomly 6y ago
  The parent never suggested anything anti-lockdown. At face value it is merely questioning the existence of a possible trade off of lockdown. As you've not provided evidence or anecdotal stories to refute the question I'm still in no better position to consider the parent's question with more information. I mean if we really want to start projecting our own agendas or anti agendas, the whole notion of "evidence" leaves a bad taste in my mouth given the WHO went on record saying "there is no evidence of human transmission". And I am saying this as a scientist! Our obsession with evidence and data is important (as what are we without empiricism) but boy has it seemed more like a curse rather than a blessing at various stages throughout this pandemic. I am definitely team Bayes on these matters, common sense and experience do hold some value sometimes.
  - Klinky 6y ago
    Germ theory and the science around vaccines is well established. Winging it because maybe some unknown might protect us sounds absurd. To get to the point where the existence of this unknown can be proven yes/no will take longer than it will to develop a vaccine.
    - yomly 6y ago
      I never questioned germ theory nor the science of vaccines. I do raise an eyebrow however when there's so much rigmarole around "evidence" and mask wearing. Just like there was rigmarole around hand washing when Semmelweis promoted it. What a bizarre hill people have made to die on. And how slow the WHO were to declare the dangers of covid in its early stages.
michaelmrose 6y ago
It's a bad theory with no medical evidence.
dehrmann 6y ago
The answer is probably "we don't know." The closest example I can think of for this is what the immune systems of ISS astronauts look like after 6 months in orbit. Listening to epidemiologists alone was/is a bad choice because they study the spread of disease. You also to consider long-term effects on the immune system, the economy, education, social structure, politics. The second-order effects have already been surprising: - Social unrest in the US - China restricting freedoms in Hong Kong - Bifurcated "K" economy - Covid case surges in countries that "did it right" with hard lockdowns

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

My pet theory is that chronic disease like obesity, combined with pre-existing immunity, and possibly some correlation to vitamin-d deficiency explains most of how this has played out. Factor in a glut of people who're living into advanced age, due to the progress of medical technology, so naturally in a precarious place against any infection. And of course, mismanagement of those people in nursing homes means guaranteed disaster. So really, I think it's much less dangerous than we've let on, but deadly to certain demographics, that happen to be larger in the West (obese, diabetic, etc.).

Klinky 6y ago
This doesn't pan out when children have developed severe inflammatory responses, young adults have died, and not all people with comorbidities have had severe reactions. You can't just say it's fat and/or old people who are having severe symptoms or dying.
- jtbayly 6y ago
  It mostly does. Those cases you mention are quite rare.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >This doesn't pan out when children have developed severe inflammatory responses, young adults have died, and not all people with comorbidities have had severe reactions How many millions has covid infected thus far? It would be concerning if it hadn't killed a couple healthy kids and not killed a couple obese old people.
  - Klinky 6y ago
    It's not "a couple", there's been about 105 child deaths, and 4600 child hospitalizations. It's not as bad as adults, but you can't say little Johnny is magically immune, nor can you say that Brad the football star at the local college is either. I don't think it's currently clear why some apparently healthy people develop severe reactions.

notatoad 6y ago

>one or more very similar viruses have been in circulation for a while the genetic makeup of covid-19 has been well studied and this is not the case. If it were multiple different diseases, it would be very obvious.

subsubzero 6y ago

I completely agree with this hypothesis, it explains why groups so disparate have all seen similar outcomes(low instances of severe covid: -homeless -celebrities -children What do all these groups have in common? Age? well count out celebrities, ie. Tom Hanks, Prince Philip(both are in advanced age). Good health? I'd count out homeless as a lot suffer from chronic ill-health. Weight? Some heavier celebrities have had covid and been fine, its an important metric though. Exposure to a lot of viruses? Yes, all three groups are in constant exposure to a multitude of viruses, from children in daycare, to celebrities interacting with tons of people to always traveling, to homeless getting exposed to viruses in trash and living in unsanitary conditions.

teorema 6y ago

I've been wondering this since the beginning, as a parent of a relatively small child in preschool. I've had one prediction all along, which is that parents of small children would probably also have lower rates of symptomatic disease, lower severity, etc. than matched controls, because they'd also be exposed to prexisting coronaviruses and therefore have some cross-immunity. You could probably extend this to other groups too. I admit it might be totally wrong but it seems straightforward to test with the right data, and if it were wrong that would also be interesting.