Amanda Kvalsvig Profile picture
Dec 2 5 tweets 2 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
If some propose that children's immune systems were harmed in 2020 by spending time in minimal/no contact with others, they should apply testable hypotheses and data in support.
eg, Children have always lived on remote islands & farms, isolated for weeks/months at a time.
1/5
1. What types of immune dysfunction are they at risk of and how do these effects manifest in health data? The list from AlKhater shows what you would measure.
And ask the flying doctors. Are country children known for being particularly sickly?

2/5 ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
Table from AlKhater et al. Features suspicious of an underlying primary or secondary immunodeficiency: 6 or more new infections in 12 months 2 or more serious sinus infections or pneumonias within 1 year 2 or more episodes of sepsis or meningitis 2 or more months of antibiotics with little effect Need for IV antibiotics and/or hospitalisation to clear infection Failure to gain weight or grow normally Resistant superficial or oral candidiasis Recurrent tissue or organ abscesses Infection with opportunistic organism such Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia Complications from a live vaccine Family...
2. If remote children move to a town/mainland (eg, for schooling) they encounter infections that are new to them. Do they suddenly start getting more serious illness than other children? How many years would you expect the immunity debt to continue? Again, measurable in data.
3/5
From my pov, my prev clinical experience + research reading suggest that for children living in remote places but otherwise materially comfortable, social isolation is def a challenge for them & distance from hospital can be a worry in an emergency. But not really infections.
4/5
So with certain children living in more intense & more prolonged isolation than Covid lockdowns and decades of health data available, why was 'immunity debt' not described until 2021?
Why didn't we see this issue before Covid arrived?
The onus is on its proponents to explain.
5/5

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Amanda Kvalsvig

Amanda Kvalsvig Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AmandaKvalsvig

Nov 19, 2022
This analogy isn't just incorrect, it’s actively harmful. The immune system is nothing like a muscle.
Immunity isn't the goal: health is the goal. There's no net benefit to health post infection, & ++ potential harms. Aiming for immunity at the expense of health is indefensible.
Alongside infection-generated immunity to pathogens, well-described health impacts include death, multiple organ damage, autoimmunity, cancers, lower immunity to other infections, birth defects, disruption of microbiome and gut barrier, viral persistence/reactivation and more.
I don’t know why measles was used as an example in the pictured tweet. Measles is a devastating epidemic pathogen that famously causes immune amnesia, ie, previously-acquired immunity is lost, increasing the risk of further infections. The immune system is not a muscle.
Read 6 tweets
Sep 25, 2022
It's hard to wrap one's brain around the idea of a new, serious, common disease.
One reaction is to see plain statements of risk as fear-mongering. Another is not to see yourself in statements of risk, because after all, you've never lost anyone or died from a pandemic before.
You can see this brain wrinkle in statements intended to reassure, eg "Most children will be fine". The statement is true, but is it grounds for permitting infection to spread? Only if you subconsciously assume that the children you care about will always be in that "most" group.
That's why one of the jobs of public health is to advocate for protection for all:
- those who are high risk & experience 'reassurance' like the above as explicit proof that their lives are not valued, &
- those who are low risk & will be blindsided when the unthinkable happens.
Read 4 tweets
Aug 6, 2022
This article is a v good explanation about Covid-19 immunity. It’s also (inadvertently) a v good explanation of why it’s vital to pick the right strategic goals. If you make immunity your strategic goal instead of population health, logic will walk you to some strange places.
1/
NZ no longer has a well-defined pandemic strategy - a key policy gap. I’ve put down some ideas about why it’s critical to choose the right goal - & why hybrid immunity doesn’t make the grade.
(I’m certain the author and commentators are all clearly aware of this fact, btw).
2/
Why ‘immunity’ is not a coherent or defensible strategic goal in a pandemic: a🧵
The images in this tweet are a 2-page text for those who prefer - but the thread will have the complete text (slightly shortened).
3/ This image is a pdf of the text in the thread.This image is a pdf version of text in the thread.
Read 16 tweets
Apr 2, 2022
It's an interesting question, how you assess potential harms from a new pathogen. My own approach with Covid and children has been:
1. All major childhood infections have potential for post-acute impacts so the question was 'what and how much' not 'whether' there would be impacts
2. Rule 1, 2, and 3 in paeds is 'listen to parents'; lived experience is a very important early signal. New health problems may go under the health system radar for a long time because they sit outside usual disease frameworks and the health system is v busy with acute illness.
3. I find that understanding the immunopathology of an infectious disease is v valuable to get a sense of what type of problems may occur. Early evidence about immune and microvascular pathology in Covid rang some big alarm bells for me wrt potential for hidden harms to children.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(