3 ms·
".. public-health officials have worried over infections in the young — assuming they would eventually help bring the disease back to those much more vulnerable
by landemva 5y ago
".. public-health officials have worried over infections in the young — assuming they would eventually help bring the disease back to those much more vulnerable."
I had wondered why we allowed workers in long term care facilities to come and go and work in multiple facilities. In/out spread transmission vector devastated older at-risk. And NY forced known carrier patients from hospital into long term care, infecting more at-risk.
Also wondering why we aren't allowing low-risk children to get it naturally and develop anti-bodies while young so they can get on with their role of being children.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago> Also wondering why we aren't allowing low-risk children to get it naturally and develop anti-bodies while young so they can get on with their role of being children. As a concerned parent I think the long term unknowns of a novel virus are a big factor. Maybe most kids are asymptomatic today, but will their development be hindered in subtle ways as they grow? Or is it possible that large communities of infected children could become a breeding ground for the virus to mutate?
- landemva 5y agoMost anything is _possible_. Any worries about long term effects of the rushed Emergency Use Authorization vaccines, which have zero long term studies?