4 ms·

> I'm not providing a reference with this comment Here is the CDC saying it: > Before the 18th century, polioviruses probably circulated widely. Initial infec

> I'm not providing a reference with this comment Here is the CDC saying it: > Before the 18th century, polioviruses probably circulated widely. Initial infections with at least one type probably occurred in early infancy, when transplacentally acquired maternal antibodies were high and protected infants from infection-causing paralysis. > In the immediate prevaccine era, during the first half of the 20th century, improved sanitation resulted in less frequent exposure and increased the age of primary infection, resulting in large epidemics with high numbers of deaths. The incidence dramatically decreased after the introduction of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in 1955 and continued to decline following oral polio vaccine (OPV) introduction in 1961. From the more than 21,000 paralytic cases reported in 1952, only 2,525 cases were reported in 1960 and 61 cases in 1965. > Poliovirus Secular Trends in the United Status: > * Before the 18th century, polioviruses probably circulated widely > * In immediate prevaccine era, improved sanitation resulted in less frequent exposure and increased age of primary infection, resulting in large epidemics with high death count > * Incidence dramatically decreased following inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) introduction in 1955 https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/polio.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/polio.html

mush_room 4y ago
This wasn't in infants, children of age to play in the streets.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  No, it's only in infants. If a child old enough to walk around is exposed to polio for the first time (no vaccination or exposure as an infant), they'll have no protection and have a serious risk of being crippled. The sanitary conditions in which infants were kept in the decades preceding polio vaccination prevented them from being exposed to polio during their short window of protection, and as soon as they left the crib they were at serious risk. It's specifically the sanitation of the living condition of infants that had the effect, not the general sanitation level of society. Polio was still circulating through the population outside during this time period, but infants were shielded from it during their short window of protection.
  - mush_room 4y ago
    ok, but the observation I was referring to was talking about those children, and how they tended do to much better when exposed to polio; maybe that's a complete fabrication, I don't have a reference on hand
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      I think you probably heard a corruption of the truth through a game of telephone. Playing outside never gave children any protection from polio, but unsanitary living conditions for infants did.
      - mush_room 4y ago
        You're right, after researching, mentions of the hygiene hypothesis all attribute the epidemic to decreases in exposure in infancy, and possibly decreases in exposure in the mother as well. But I did find where I got that from, for whatever it's worth, George Carlin: > When I was a little boy in New York City in the 1940s, we swam in the Hudson River, and it was filled with raw sewage. OK? We swam in raw sewage — you know, to cool off. And at that time, the big fear was polio. Thousands of kids died from polio every year. But you know something? In my neighborhood, no one ever got polio. No one. Ever. You know why? 'Cause we swam in raw sewage. (from https://www.businessinsider.com/george-carlin-why-we-need-to-get-dirty-2015-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/george-carlin-why-we-need-to...) [edit]: I do wonder if, because I have no reason to doubt it's true, what being exposed to sewage-infested water did is provide some sort of vaccination, by means of exposure to very low levels - insufficient for infection - of pathogens including polio. After all, that kind of analogue process is what early vaccination was. [edit 2]: that might still be completely off, I mean, reading about it I understand that at the time, 10x as many children would die by accidents, and 3x from cancer.
triplesec 4y ago
Does this take into account the fact that before hygiene, germ theory and the beginning of the C20th, most infants died early? Dying of these pathogens as an infant is a reliable way not to catch them later in life.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  It has nothing to do with mortality rates generally, and is specifically about polio. Polio generally wasn't killing very young infants, most of them were protected by antibodies from their mothers. My guess is that sanitary conditions during infancy were still a net positive overall. Just not with respect to polio specifically. To protect children from polio you either need vaccination with dead/weak polio, or exposure to polio as an infant when they had protection from maternal antibodies. Either way teaches the immune system to fight polio, but without either of those the risk of polio rises with age. An adult who catches polio is about 10x more likely to die than a child (not infant) who catches it.
addingadimensio 4y ago
> * In immediate prevaccine era, improved sanitation resulted in less frequent exposure and increased age of primary infection, resulting in large epidemics with high death count How do you suss out the difference between increasing sanitation vs vaccination in a time where sanitation is on an upwards trajectory? Polio is spread from feces. Eventually people stopped drinking contaminated water. full stop.
User23 4y ago
I’ve heard that poliomyelitis (the specific nerve damage) can be also caused by other things than the poliovirus. Most notably certain pesticides that are fortunately no longer in widespread use. It’s hard to find non kooky references, but the notion of environmental poisons in the gut somehow transferring to the lower spinal cord sounds at least plausible.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

mush_room 4y ago

This wasn't in infants, children of age to play in the streets.

MichaelCollins 4y ago
No, it's only in infants. If a child old enough to walk around is exposed to polio for the first time (no vaccination or exposure as an infant), they'll have no protection and have a serious risk of being crippled. The sanitary conditions in which infants were kept in the decades preceding polio vaccination prevented them from being exposed to polio during their short window of protection, and as soon as they left the crib they were at serious risk. It's specifically the sanitation of the living condition of infants that had the effect, not the general sanitation level of society. Polio was still circulating through the population outside during this time period, but infants were shielded from it during their short window of protection.
- mush_room 4y ago
  ok, but the observation I was referring to was talking about those children, and how they tended do to much better when exposed to polio; maybe that's a complete fabrication, I don't have a reference on hand
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    I think you probably heard a corruption of the truth through a game of telephone. Playing outside never gave children any protection from polio, but unsanitary living conditions for infants did.
    - mush_room 4y ago
      You're right, after researching, mentions of the hygiene hypothesis all attribute the epidemic to decreases in exposure in infancy, and possibly decreases in exposure in the mother as well. But I did find where I got that from, for whatever it's worth, George Carlin: > When I was a little boy in New York City in the 1940s, we swam in the Hudson River, and it was filled with raw sewage. OK? We swam in raw sewage — you know, to cool off. And at that time, the big fear was polio. Thousands of kids died from polio every year. But you know something? In my neighborhood, no one ever got polio. No one. Ever. You know why? 'Cause we swam in raw sewage. (from https://www.businessinsider.com/george-carlin-why-we-need-to-get-dirty-2015-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/george-carlin-why-we-need-to...) [edit]: I do wonder if, because I have no reason to doubt it's true, what being exposed to sewage-infested water did is provide some sort of vaccination, by means of exposure to very low levels - insufficient for infection - of pathogens including polio. After all, that kind of analogue process is what early vaccination was. [edit 2]: that might still be completely off, I mean, reading about it I understand that at the time, 10x as many children would die by accidents, and 3x from cancer.

triplesec 4y ago

Does this take into account the fact that before hygiene, germ theory and the beginning of the C20th, most infants died early? Dying of these pathogens as an infant is a reliable way not to catch them later in life.

MichaelCollins 4y ago
It has nothing to do with mortality rates generally, and is specifically about polio. Polio generally wasn't killing very young infants, most of them were protected by antibodies from their mothers. My guess is that sanitary conditions during infancy were still a net positive overall. Just not with respect to polio specifically. To protect children from polio you either need vaccination with dead/weak polio, or exposure to polio as an infant when they had protection from maternal antibodies. Either way teaches the immune system to fight polio, but without either of those the risk of polio rises with age. An adult who catches polio is about 10x more likely to die than a child (not infant) who catches it.

addingadimensio 4y ago

> * In immediate prevaccine era, improved sanitation resulted in less frequent exposure and increased age of primary infection, resulting in large epidemics with high death count How do you suss out the difference between increasing sanitation vs vaccination in a time where sanitation is on an upwards trajectory? Polio is spread from feces. Eventually people stopped drinking contaminated water. full stop.

User23 4y ago

I’ve heard that poliomyelitis (the specific nerve damage) can be also caused by other things than the poliovirus. Most notably certain pesticides that are fortunately no longer in widespread use. It’s hard to find non kooky references, but the notion of environmental poisons in the gut somehow transferring to the lower spinal cord sounds at least plausible.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]