3 ms·

I tend to disagree. I think we have it wrong when we think of infected or not. I think the reality of it is many slight exposures over periods of time where peo

I tend to disagree. I think we have it wrong when we think of infected or not. I think the reality of it is many slight exposures over periods of time where people's bodies have higher immunity and lower immunity towards things. For example if I am breathing covid at a rate of 5% of everyone else and I don't get "infected" but I get a few particles that replicate but don't take hold - I probably will get labeled one of the "asymptomic" folks. Compare that to someone that get's a mouth full of it - will probably get sick because of the viral load. When there's a crap-ton of it in the air, even without a mask say at a public park where you're standing far away from someone - someone's covid particles are probably being inhaled - again, since the virus is now "everywhere" it offers a chance for more people to get that slight infection that doesn't take hold. And I say slight because while there's a lot, it's spread over a a large area due to wind, so it's like getting a 1% infection instead of the 100% indoor infection.

clairity 5y ago
there’s not a ‘crap-ton’ of (active) covid floating around in the air, super-especially not outside. the virus is relatively fragile and falls apart rapidly due to a variety of natural and man-made forces. moreover, outside, there is a shit-ton of air for the virus to dissipate into far away from any and all people. active virus can only really concentrate to threshold infectious levels when in face-to-face conversation due to continuous exposure of active virus (before it falls apart due to external forces). with that said, yes, getting a lot of under-threshold exposure can build immunity without getting sick (i.e., asymptomatic infection). this is a mechanism that’s often used by our bodies to develop novel disease resistance, but has been suppressed for public discussion for largely mediopolitical reasons.
- acjohnson55 5y ago
  I don't think it's suppressed. Who hasn't heard about viral load at this point? It's just poorly understood.
  - clairity 5y ago
    it’s not just ignorance. many people find the idea that ‘exposure to a little viral load trains the immune system without overloading it’ to be a very dangerous one worthy of suppression, even though it’s common and natural, because it throws into question the rhetoric buttressing current mandates. it’s never even whispered by democrats or their sympathetic media, for example. folks highly supportive of mandates, evidenced by voting/moderation patterns here and on social media, as another.
    - acjohnson55 5y ago
      It's not being suppressed. Policy needs to have a basis in research and scientific consensus, and my understanding is that there is not currently a great deal of research on exposure to small amounts of virus on humans, in real life conditions. For one thing, there are major ethics and safety issues to studying this. For another, viruses don't all behave the same.

clairity 5y ago

there’s not a ‘crap-ton’ of (active) covid floating around in the air, super-especially not outside. the virus is relatively fragile and falls apart rapidly due to a variety of natural and man-made forces. moreover, outside, there is a shit-ton of air for the virus to dissipate into far away from any and all people. active virus can only really concentrate to threshold infectious levels when in face-to-face conversation due to continuous exposure of active virus (before it falls apart due to external forces). with that said, yes, getting a lot of under-threshold exposure can build immunity without getting sick (i.e., asymptomatic infection). this is a mechanism that’s often used by our bodies to develop novel disease resistance, but has been suppressed for public discussion for largely mediopolitical reasons.

acjohnson55 5y ago
I don't think it's suppressed. Who hasn't heard about viral load at this point? It's just poorly understood.
- clairity 5y ago
  it’s not just ignorance. many people find the idea that ‘exposure to a little viral load trains the immune system without overloading it’ to be a very dangerous one worthy of suppression, even though it’s common and natural, because it throws into question the rhetoric buttressing current mandates. it’s never even whispered by democrats or their sympathetic media, for example. folks highly supportive of mandates, evidenced by voting/moderation patterns here and on social media, as another.
  - acjohnson55 5y ago
    It's not being suppressed. Policy needs to have a basis in research and scientific consensus, and my understanding is that there is not currently a great deal of research on exposure to small amounts of virus on humans, in real life conditions. For one thing, there are major ethics and safety issues to studying this. For another, viruses don't all behave the same.