until the long-term effects of the virus are known, this is dangerously irresponsible
If you test positive but are asymptomatic how long are you capable of reading the virus, weeks days forever ??
Now that takes me back. I was born in 1958, and I do remember when I was a kid that if some kid in the neighborhood had the German Measles, the other parents would sent their daughters over to play. The idea being that better to get it over with now than take a chance on them getting it during child bearing age. I did not realize that they did this with chickenpox as well.
-—as one who was taken (along with my sisters) to get chicken pox from my cousins in the early ‘50’s , I think it would work-—but not in our present political atmosphere-—
Just a thought from someone who is not a doctor.
As soon as you become infected you start to develop antibodies, right? I guess the question is how much faster does the disease progress compared to antibody progression.
There’s two ways a flu (and presumably the virus) can start: in the nose/throat by contact (usually with your unwashed hands) or directly in the lungs by breathing in aerosolized particles.
The disease is mild-ish in the upper respiratory tract but becomes much more dnagerous when/if it progresses to the lungs.
A thought: if you’re going to get it anyway (as the health officials keep saying) would it be better to get it into your nose, and let the disease progress hopefully slowly and hope you have antibodies built up by the time it gets to the lungs.
vs. taking the chance (again, high likelihood) that you get it later, but maybe you breath it in directly to your lungs and it progresses too fast?
Any doctors have an insight here?
This approach assumes two facts not in evidence: That immunity comes as a result of contact (whether or not you become ill) and that “People who are immune cannot pass on the disease to others”.
I have yet to see data supporting either of these two contentions.
This isn’t chicken pox.
Physician from Portland, Oregon? Must be out of his mind to suggest this.
Why not? What could give wrong?
Russian roulette.
You first, Douglas A. Perednia.
Sounds like extended spring break.
Sounds like extended spring break.
Heard some commentary yesterday on how STOOOOOOOPID it was to shut down our colleges and universities.
Instead of letting the youngest, healthiest group stay together in one place to build herd immunity we sent them all home to their parents and grandparents with existing health conditions.
Didn’t this type of party assume that mom and dad had already been exposed in their youth? That would not be the case with Covid-19.
Article is a perfect example of why the Federalist is despised as a far right wing libertarian dirtbag rag.
Now is not the time to be voluntarily infecting people.
This dirtbag MD should hve his licenses revoked for malpractice and incompetence.
So a 20 something year old who is discovered to have leukemia while under treatment for COVID-19 who died without leaving the ICU is omitted. After all, the leukemia probably had something to do with his death. But from his, and his friend's and families point of view that isn't really true. Without the COVID-19 infection the young man had an almost 98% chance of being alive 5 years from now.
A 12 year old just died with a COVID-19 infection in the USA. The health department is trying to blame it on other causes, and they may be right, but to everyone else involved the question is what would be the probability that they young girl would be alive if COVID-19 was not present.