" The Covid-19 pandemic may be behind us, but its effects are still evident across Europe.
In the aftermath, countries are seeing an increase in viral infections, particularly among children and teenagers."
"Are these infections a cause for alarm, or is it a natural consequence of our post-pandemic world?"
" England, Germany and France have also reported higher incidences of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in recent years.
As Dr. Peter Openshaw, a respiratory doctor from Imperial College London, told Euronews: “There has been quite a bounce-back
in a number of these infections which were not circulating significantly for a good winter or two, and they came back with quite a vengeance.”
"What is immunity debt?
The concept of “immunity debt” has been frequently discussed as an explanation for this surge in post-pandemic infections.
During the height of the pandemic, non-Covid illnesses saw a significant drop due to widespread restrictions such as social distancing,
frequent handwashing, and reduced social interaction.
These preventative measures led to the temporary suppression of many common viruses. "
"Some viruses, like certain flu strains, disappeared during this period, while others re-emerged once restrictions were lifted.
This phenomenon, known as “immunity debt”, refers to the delayed exposure to viruses,resulting in more people being susceptible to infection when normal social interactions resumed." (Emphasis Mine)
"The term “immunity debt” has sparked debate, particularly around the notion that natural infections are better for immunity than vaccines.
Some critics suggest that the concept implies pandemic restrictions were unnecessary because people eventually got sick anyway.
However, Dr. Openshaw disproves this, telling Euronews that public health measures “saved many, many thousands, possibly millions of lives.”
The post-pandemic rise in infections, he adds, was largely inevitable. RSV and immunity debt"
"Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) offers an example of immunity debt supposedly in action.
Most children typically contract RSV by age two, but during the pandemic, babies were kept away from others, delaying their exposure.
Once restrictions eased, the virus spread quickly among those who had never encountered it before.
However, this delay may not be entirely negative, as RSV is particularly dangerous for infants under six months old.
Dr Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease doctor and senior scholar at the US Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security,
told Euronews,
“Each human owed their debt to RSV, and it just got delayed.
The debt collector was coming.” (The article continues…)
Notion?
roll eyes......
I have a few criticisms of this article.
First, the notion that countries are seeing an increase in viral infections. Really? Is this an actual increase, or is it merely a rebound to pre-pandemic levels, since all communicable respiratory illnesses dropped during the pandemic due to masking, social distancing, and quarantine?
Second, this concept of “immunity debt.” These words simply do not go together. A debt is something you pay back, and immunity is not something that you “pay back,” literally or figuratively. Your immunity against any pathogen that you have previously had immunity to drops over time, until such time as you become susceptible to the pathogen again. There is no debt. You do not have negative immunity that must be restored to zero before your body can start developing immunity again. And if you are keeping up with vaccinations (especially the influenza and Covid vaccines), you have been keeping your immunity against those diseases from dropping to zero, regardless of how prevalent those diseases are in the community.
The article mentions that there is debate “particularly around the notion that natural infections are better for immunity than vaccines.” Actually, among the scientific community, there is no debate. The whole notion that getting immunity by catching a disease that can kill you is somehow better than getting immunity from a vaccine was invented wholesale by professional antivaxxers who either are trying to sell snake oil, trying to kill people, or both. The notion is so ludicrous that I cannot wrap my head around how anyone can possible hear it and think it makes sense. I don’t want my house to burn down, so I set it on fire? I don’t want a flat tire, so I slash my tires? The purpose of getting immunized is so that you have the immunity if you are ever exposed to the pathogen. The premise of developing immunity prior to exposure is that you will not have to face the potentially deadly consequences of catching the disease. Catching the disease so that you won’t catch it is nonsensical.
The article used RSV as an example of this so-called “immunity debt” (again putting two words together that really don’t belong together). The children whose exposure to RSV occurred later do not have a “debt” that they had to repay. They benefitted because they had extra time for their immune systems to develop before they were exposed to this virus. Children are basically born without an immune system and it takes several years for it to mature.