4 ms·

> Beyond which we realize that we've inadvertently cultivated a debilitated fragile population that can only survive through sophisticated technological methods

by rixed 6y ago

> Beyond which we realize that we've inadvertently cultivated a debilitated fragile population that can only survive through sophisticated technological methods. Can you think of a causal mechanism that would make the population more fragile because of vaccines? Or is it just some inocent poetry from the same old book than "everything that does not kill us makes us stronger"?

emboliart 6y ago
(From another answer I wrote in this thread) Think of dental braces. In old times, without orthodontics, misaligned teeth would be a visible marker of less than optimal fitness. Ugly. Negative selection pressure. As orthodontics becomes more prevalent, in the beginning lots of people get a beauty boost. Celebrate! Yet, in a few generations, a larger and larger fraction of the population now needs more and more sophisticated dental braces. Teeth simply don't fit on the mandible anymore, because there is no selection force to prefer people with good teeth as marriage partners. Everybody has visibly good teeth! We can keep this illusion going with technology, but it's a growing problem. Should we close orthodontics clinics tomorrow? Probably not, but that should not prevent us from recognizing the long term hidden costs of medical technology. Use sparingly, mostly for emergencies.
- rixed 6y ago
  Sorry but arguing that it's better to let people die from illness rather than fight a virus with medicine will require more than an analogy. I asked for a mechanism that would make the population more fragile overall (not only less resistant to a specific strain of a specific virus) if we train the immune system with a vaccine. Also keep in mind this is an age disease, ie those who are more likely to die from the virus will do so after their reproductive period. (Note: do you seriously believe today's teeth are more troublesome and less fit for the job than in the past ?)

by rixed 6y ago

emboliart 6y ago

(From another answer I wrote in this thread) Think of dental braces. In old times, without orthodontics, misaligned teeth would be a visible marker of less than optimal fitness. Ugly. Negative selection pressure. As orthodontics becomes more prevalent, in the beginning lots of people get a beauty boost. Celebrate! Yet, in a few generations, a larger and larger fraction of the population now needs more and more sophisticated dental braces. Teeth simply don't fit on the mandible anymore, because there is no selection force to prefer people with good teeth as marriage partners. Everybody has visibly good teeth! We can keep this illusion going with technology, but it's a growing problem. Should we close orthodontics clinics tomorrow? Probably not, but that should not prevent us from recognizing the long term hidden costs of medical technology. Use sparingly, mostly for emergencies.

rixed 6y ago
Sorry but arguing that it's better to let people die from illness rather than fight a virus with medicine will require more than an analogy. I asked for a mechanism that would make the population more fragile overall (not only less resistant to a specific strain of a specific virus) if we train the immune system with a vaccine. Also keep in mind this is an age disease, ie those who are more likely to die from the virus will do so after their reproductive period. (Note: do you seriously believe today's teeth are more troublesome and less fit for the job than in the past ?)