Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

ottawacitizen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 149 posts

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#51

Post by btilly »

croes wrote: post #25
btilly wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the known things is that babies who get seriously sick somewhere in their first year have a better immune system for life. So yes, failing to be exposed to viral diseases can be bad for you.

Are you sure you aren't falling for survivor bias?

Very sure. The fatality rate is negligible and the boost is significant.

See https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/12/06/daycare.kids/index.htm... for a random news article reporting on a similar result only with kids getting sick in daycare. Being exposed to diseases early builds immunity later.

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#54

Post by faitswulff »

ajross wrote: post #38
Havoc wrote: post #34

Everyone eat a spoon full of dirt and call it a day

Not to throw too much water on the joke, but in fact modern urban dirt has a distinctly different microbiome than the earth we'd have traditionally lived on. Everything coevolves.

Urban dirt can also have lead in it, which is something you have to test for if you’re raising egg-laying chickens. Otherwise it ends up in the eggs.

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#55

Post by faitswulff »

bequanna wrote: post #41
faitswulff wrote: post #4

There's a difference between being exposed to dirt and being exposed to viral diseases, though. Playing outside in the leaves will likely trigger healthy immune responses. Contracting COVID-19 may lead to long term health issues.

> Contracting COVID-19 may lead to long term health issues. Uh-huh. And what percentage of people who contract have "long term health issues"? This is just more scaremongering based on self-reporting and anecdotes.

“Three-quarters of Wuhan patients hospitalized for Covid-19 still had symptoms 6 months later, Chinese study finds”

https://abc17news.com/news/national-world/2021/01/12/three-q...

N = 1,700+

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#56

Post by scythe »

collyw wrote: post #37
clairity wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 vir…

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 takin…

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

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#57

Post by nradov »

faitswulff wrote: post #4

There's a difference between being exposed to dirt and being exposed to viral diseases, though. Playing outside in the leaves will likely trigger healthy immune responses. Contracting COVID-19 may lead to long term health issues.

It's not just dirt. Traditionally people lived in close proximity to a variety of domestic animals. Most viruses originated in animals and then crossed to humans. So our immune systems evolved to cope with that exposure.

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#58

Post by clairity »

faitswulff wrote: post #36
clairity wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 vir…

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 hypothe…

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.

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#59

Post by krona »

addicted wrote: post #39
clairity wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 vir…

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.

This is such utter nonsense.

I think parent is just stating the null hypothesis? Why be so dismissive?

Re: Scientists fear pandemic's 'hyper hygiene' could have long-term health impacts

#60

Post by Uehreka »

bequanna wrote: post #41
faitswulff wrote: post #4

There's a difference between being exposed to dirt and being exposed to viral diseases, though. Playing outside in the leaves will likely trigger healthy immune responses. Contracting COVID-19 may lead to long term health issues.

> Contracting COVID-19 may lead to long term health issues. Uh-huh. And what percentage of people who contract have "long term health issues"? This is just more scaremongering based on self-reporting and anecdotes.

/sigh 30 seconds of Googling and you can find this from the BMJ

“Around 10% of patients who have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 virus remain unwell beyond three weeks, and a smaller proportion for months (see box [1]).[7] This is based on the UK COVID Symptom Study, in which people enter their ongoing symptoms on a smartphone app. This percentage is lower than that cited in many published observational studies,[8][9] whose denominator populations were those admitted to hospital or attending specialist clinics. A recent US study found that only 65% of people had returned to their previous level of health 14-21 days after a positive test.[10]”

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3026

Post reply on HN