5 ms·

how do you supposed herd immunity develops without low level exposure to viruses and organisms (which is what's in the dirt)? it's quite likely we've prolonged

how do you supposed herd immunity develops without low level exposure to viruses and organisms (which is what's in the dirt)? it's quite likely we've prolonged the pandemic by excessively curtailing exposure, which in turn dampens in vivo immune response necessary for natural herd immunity in the population. the 1918 flu, which killed 10-20% of the infected, was worthy of that kind of avoidance response, not this virus that kills much less than 1% (and maims far fewer, contrary to your claim). the tiresome messaging (fear strangers and non-conformists; trust our "science", not theirs) of politicians and sympathetic media played this pandemic for maximum political & economic gain, not minimizing impact. it's disgusting.

faitswulff 6y ago
Have you heard of any coronavirus variants coming out of South Korea, China, or New Zealand? No. That’s because they don’t have uncontrolled spread there, which leads to mutations due to the virus’s exposure to heterogenous immunity in the population. So uncontrolled spread doesn’t necessarily shorten the duration of the pandemic. All of which is actually incidental to the point I was making, that the hygiene hypothesis is about exposure to dirt and pathogens that prime your immune system for healthy responses. You can have healthy exposure to dirt without exposure to whole classes of viral diseases. No one’s going to say you have to catch Ebola to solve the hygiene hypothesis, for example.
- mbg721 6y ago
  I think the idea is that not every virus is Covid or Ebola. If you oversanitize your way out of every common cold, then the more serious diseases hit harder.
- clairity 6y ago
  mutations happen not as a response to effective defenses as implied by 'heterogenous immunity', but because the replication process is chaotic, introducing a range of defects and accidental benefits. it's a random process as likely to prolong as it is to shorten the duration, so has no persuasive power in your direction. as for your second point, we're exposed to coronaviruses of all sorts already (viruses that have spike proteins)--the relevant class of viral disease here--and that's what's likely to have conferred mild/asymptomatic cases in the majority of the infected.
  - faitswulff 6y ago
    Immunity plus uncontrolled spread necessarily exposes the virus to selective pressures to mutate resistance to those immunities.
    - clairity 6y ago
      immunity plus spread necessarily exposes the virus to selective pressures. 'uncontrolled' isn't special in this regard.
      - faitswulff 6y ago
        Right, and in places where there is no spread or very limited spread, you will get far fewer successful mutations.
- loveistheanswer 6y ago
  >Have you heard of any coronavirus variants coming out of South Korea, China, or New Zealand? No. That’s because they don’t have uncontrolled spread there, which leads to mutations due to the virus’s exposure to heterogenous immunity in the population. That's one hypothesis. Don't particular populations already have a degree of natural herd immunity to viruses which are commonly found in their proximity, compared to populations on the other side of the world who do not? Like how Europeans brought their diseases, which they had built up immunity against, to the Americas which then decimated the indigenous populations. Could we hypothesize that many Asians have a stronger natural immunity to covid19?
  - faitswulff 6y ago
    The term you’re looking for is cross-reactivity and it’s possible that populations have some cross reactivity to COVID. In fact, I’ve heard a hypothesis that the pandemic of 1890 was the predecessor of one of the common cold coronaviruses. Regardless, New Zealand is clearly not an Asian country.
    - loveistheanswer 6y ago
      Cross-reactivity! Thanks, TIL. New Zealand is obviously a bit of a red herring considering it is an affluent island nation with a low population density.
collyw 6y ago
It's frightening how much censorship there is around non-consensual views on covid. Sure there are a few nutters blaming 5g masts, but there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of the way it is currently being handled. The Great Barrington Declaration has numerous signatories from well respected scientists, however it is dismissed, without any debate and lumped alongside antivaxxers and conspiracy theorists for taking the wrong view.
- addicted 6y ago
  The great barrington declaration also doesn’t have a single scientific claim that is backed up with any research. The top HN comment of any article with more than 10 comments on it will always almost have more content and less fluff than the great barrington declaration.
  - collyw 6y ago
    The same as lockdown policies then.
- scythe 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration Just to save everyone time: >The declaration calls for individuals at significantly lower risk of dying from COVID-19 – as well as those at higher risk who so wish – to be allowed to resume their normal lives, working normally at their usual workplaces rather than from home, socializing in bars and restaurants, and gathering at sporting and cultural events. >The World Health Organization and numerous academic and public-health bodies have stated that the proposed strategy is dangerous, unethical, and lacks a sound scientific basis. >It was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian think tank that is part of a Koch-funded network of organizations associated with climate change denial
  - collyw 6y ago
    Here is a challenge for you. Find out where the idea for lockdowns came from and the science behind those. (There is none - we just blindly copied an authoritarian regime).
addicted 6y ago
This is such utter nonsense. In countries which did allow the pandemic to spread healthcare systems were quickly overloaded and people died in droves, not just from the pandemic but also from not being able to receive care for other healthcare issues.
- krona 6y ago
  This is such utter nonsense. I think parent is just stating the null hypothesis? Why be so dismissive?
- jshevek 6y ago
  The first sentence adds nothing of value to your response. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- rossdavidh 6y ago
  I think there are plausible counterarguments, but the results in, for example, Sweden look much like France, and the results in Belarus look much like other eastern European nations (which is to say, better than western European ones). Not that either Sweden or Belarus did nothing, but it does suggest that the measures taken by most countries, did not have an enormous impact, if any. Japan did less than most countries in Europe, but their total cases and deaths per capita are <10% of any nation in Europe (which is not to say they are zero or even negligible). Again, regardless of what you believe, on balance, of the article's implications, the phrase "utter nonsense" suggests that it is not worth thinking about, and it clearly is worth thinking about and researching, at least.
  - collyw 6y ago
    Switerland didn't bother with a second lockdown and coped fine. Hospitals got full (like most winters) but nothing more.

faitswulff 6y ago

Have you heard of any coronavirus variants coming out of South Korea, China, or New Zealand? No. That’s because they don’t have uncontrolled spread there, which leads to mutations due to the virus’s exposure to heterogenous immunity in the population. So uncontrolled spread doesn’t necessarily shorten the duration of the pandemic. All of which is actually incidental to the point I was making, that the hygiene hypothesis is about exposure to dirt and pathogens that prime your immune system for healthy responses. You can have healthy exposure to dirt without exposure to whole classes of viral diseases. No one’s going to say you have to catch Ebola to solve the hygiene hypothesis, for example.

mbg721 6y ago
I think the idea is that not every virus is Covid or Ebola. If you oversanitize your way out of every common cold, then the more serious diseases hit harder.
clairity 6y ago
mutations happen not as a response to effective defenses as implied by 'heterogenous immunity', but because the replication process is chaotic, introducing a range of defects and accidental benefits. it's a random process as likely to prolong as it is to shorten the duration, so has no persuasive power in your direction. as for your second point, we're exposed to coronaviruses of all sorts already (viruses that have spike proteins)--the relevant class of viral disease here--and that's what's likely to have conferred mild/asymptomatic cases in the majority of the infected.
- faitswulff 6y ago
  Immunity plus uncontrolled spread necessarily exposes the virus to selective pressures to mutate resistance to those immunities.
  - clairity 6y ago
    immunity plus spread necessarily exposes the virus to selective pressures. 'uncontrolled' isn't special in this regard.
    - faitswulff 6y ago
      Right, and in places where there is no spread or very limited spread, you will get far fewer successful mutations.
loveistheanswer 6y ago
>Have you heard of any coronavirus variants coming out of South Korea, China, or New Zealand? No. That’s because they don’t have uncontrolled spread there, which leads to mutations due to the virus’s exposure to heterogenous immunity in the population. That's one hypothesis. Don't particular populations already have a degree of natural herd immunity to viruses which are commonly found in their proximity, compared to populations on the other side of the world who do not? Like how Europeans brought their diseases, which they had built up immunity against, to the Americas which then decimated the indigenous populations. Could we hypothesize that many Asians have a stronger natural immunity to covid19?
- faitswulff 6y ago
  The term you’re looking for is cross-reactivity and it’s possible that populations have some cross reactivity to COVID. In fact, I’ve heard a hypothesis that the pandemic of 1890 was the predecessor of one of the common cold coronaviruses. Regardless, New Zealand is clearly not an Asian country.
  - loveistheanswer 6y ago
    Cross-reactivity! Thanks, TIL. New Zealand is obviously a bit of a red herring considering it is an affluent island nation with a low population density.

collyw 6y ago

It's frightening how much censorship there is around non-consensual views on covid. Sure there are a few nutters blaming 5g masts, but there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of the way it is currently being handled. The Great Barrington Declaration has numerous signatories from well respected scientists, however it is dismissed, without any debate and lumped alongside antivaxxers and conspiracy theorists for taking the wrong view.

addicted 6y ago
The great barrington declaration also doesn’t have a single scientific claim that is backed up with any research. The top HN comment of any article with more than 10 comments on it will always almost have more content and less fluff than the great barrington declaration.
- collyw 6y ago
  The same as lockdown policies then.
scythe 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration Just to save everyone time: >The declaration calls for individuals at significantly lower risk of dying from COVID-19 – as well as those at higher risk who so wish – to be allowed to resume their normal lives, working normally at their usual workplaces rather than from home, socializing in bars and restaurants, and gathering at sporting and cultural events. >The World Health Organization and numerous academic and public-health bodies have stated that the proposed strategy is dangerous, unethical, and lacks a sound scientific basis. >It was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian think tank that is part of a Koch-funded network of organizations associated with climate change denial
- collyw 6y ago
  Here is a challenge for you. Find out where the idea for lockdowns came from and the science behind those. (There is none - we just blindly copied an authoritarian regime).

addicted 6y ago

This is such utter nonsense. In countries which did allow the pandemic to spread healthcare systems were quickly overloaded and people died in droves, not just from the pandemic but also from not being able to receive care for other healthcare issues.

krona 6y ago
This is such utter nonsense. I think parent is just stating the null hypothesis? Why be so dismissive?
jshevek 6y ago
The first sentence adds nothing of value to your response. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
rossdavidh 6y ago
I think there are plausible counterarguments, but the results in, for example, Sweden look much like France, and the results in Belarus look much like other eastern European nations (which is to say, better than western European ones). Not that either Sweden or Belarus did nothing, but it does suggest that the measures taken by most countries, did not have an enormous impact, if any. Japan did less than most countries in Europe, but their total cases and deaths per capita are <10% of any nation in Europe (which is not to say they are zero or even negligible). Again, regardless of what you believe, on balance, of the article's implications, the phrase "utter nonsense" suggests that it is not worth thinking about, and it clearly is worth thinking about and researching, at least.
- collyw 6y ago
  Switerland didn't bother with a second lockdown and coped fine. Hospitals got full (like most winters) but nothing more.