It's not better to have long term memory T cells to the virus itself because it's sign you were infected and I'm yet to see a good rationale for infection that doesn't implicitly assume safety and clearance of infection and virus rather than persistence and chronic infection and risk of death.
Would you apply a similar reasoning for HIV? Having T-cells can be bad too. Having no antibodies can be good too. Mucosal antibodies might have downsides, but the most important downside it's preventing is onward transmission and that stop evolution instantly. No transmission, no infection.
How do we know if SARS-Cov-2 can permanently stay in our tissues and kill us later. Maybe for adults we can experiment but if viral reactivation is something the virus can do like Shingles, then I have to be very concerned about trying to give young people the disease as strategy to fight future disease. We have no clue what this thing does and it seems seems to care. We haven't even figured out yet how it causes myocarditis.
Think about it this way. If this was HIV and we didn't know it was like HIV and it took decades for it to become AIDS. Then what's the scientific justification for us to expose our children to this other than just hopium?
It's a coronavirus. All receptor-mediated endocytosis viruses have potential access to neurons and cardiovascular cells. Why? Because the receptors overlap all over the place. Yet children get by just fine without being hermetically sealed. The immune system is not interested in the things you want it to be. That's the grounds for "hopium."
Alright. I'll make a prediction and you can make a competing one.
If and when the vaccination in the 5-11 age cohort starts (which I am doing all I can to get them to pause), you will see 4-10 times the level of infant mortality globally. The ones that die the soonest will the ones who got the vaccine while having prior exposure.
If you think this will not happen, then write it down today here, so that we can know the spokesperson for the immune system was right after all. I don't pretend to know what the immune system cares about. I do think this is the most dangerous mistake of all time, the idea that we have to infect our children to save them because it's a coronavirus and it's always been good until now. Vaccination changes everything.
I don't understand. Convalescent+mRNAtransfected mortality as a signal for harms from A (infection) as opposed to A+B (infection + intervention)? Anyway, the selection biases on "child + positive PCR test" are unknown (whereas reinfection studies suggest that +PCR test is a pretty good correlate for infection in adults), so I don't think the "while having prior exposure" cohort can be identified with very much confidence. Rather, it's more likely that for young kids SARS-CoV-2 = just another coronavirus, and they acclimate in a more gradual matter with constant T Cell updates. Lots of adults probably acclimate the same way, it's just a question of the minority of adults who don't (it's been 19 months and we're still at low levels of natural infection).
Obviously vaccination changes everything. But sensitization to "expressed" spike to generate some antibodies is just vaccination by other means. The only way spike should be encountered is with the virus, so the immune system can put it in context.
I'll argue the opposite of Brain's thesis:
It's not better to have long term memory T cells to the virus itself because it's sign you were infected and I'm yet to see a good rationale for infection that doesn't implicitly assume safety and clearance of infection and virus rather than persistence and chronic infection and risk of death.
Would you apply a similar reasoning for HIV? Having T-cells can be bad too. Having no antibodies can be good too. Mucosal antibodies might have downsides, but the most important downside it's preventing is onward transmission and that stop evolution instantly. No transmission, no infection.
Good point. However, perhaps for healthy children, the disease is much better and long-lasting for their immune response?
How do we know if SARS-Cov-2 can permanently stay in our tissues and kill us later. Maybe for adults we can experiment but if viral reactivation is something the virus can do like Shingles, then I have to be very concerned about trying to give young people the disease as strategy to fight future disease. We have no clue what this thing does and it seems seems to care. We haven't even figured out yet how it causes myocarditis.
Think about it this way. If this was HIV and we didn't know it was like HIV and it took decades for it to become AIDS. Then what's the scientific justification for us to expose our children to this other than just hopium?
It's a coronavirus. All receptor-mediated endocytosis viruses have potential access to neurons and cardiovascular cells. Why? Because the receptors overlap all over the place. Yet children get by just fine without being hermetically sealed. The immune system is not interested in the things you want it to be. That's the grounds for "hopium."
Alright. I'll make a prediction and you can make a competing one.
If and when the vaccination in the 5-11 age cohort starts (which I am doing all I can to get them to pause), you will see 4-10 times the level of infant mortality globally. The ones that die the soonest will the ones who got the vaccine while having prior exposure.
If you think this will not happen, then write it down today here, so that we can know the spokesperson for the immune system was right after all. I don't pretend to know what the immune system cares about. I do think this is the most dangerous mistake of all time, the idea that we have to infect our children to save them because it's a coronavirus and it's always been good until now. Vaccination changes everything.
I don't understand. Convalescent+mRNAtransfected mortality as a signal for harms from A (infection) as opposed to A+B (infection + intervention)? Anyway, the selection biases on "child + positive PCR test" are unknown (whereas reinfection studies suggest that +PCR test is a pretty good correlate for infection in adults), so I don't think the "while having prior exposure" cohort can be identified with very much confidence. Rather, it's more likely that for young kids SARS-CoV-2 = just another coronavirus, and they acclimate in a more gradual matter with constant T Cell updates. Lots of adults probably acclimate the same way, it's just a question of the minority of adults who don't (it's been 19 months and we're still at low levels of natural infection).
Obviously vaccination changes everything. But sensitization to "expressed" spike to generate some antibodies is just vaccination by other means. The only way spike should be encountered is with the virus, so the immune system can put it in context.