How many cases have there been of people getting sick from things on their bathroom counter though? Like sure, you're measuring the physical phenomena and then concluding it leads to sickness but how significantly does it lead to sickness?
Similar to how many (?) cases of patients getting sick from a doctor’s neck tie or a nurse having used a touchscreen. It’s almost certainly not zero. Is it a lot though?
When one child gets sick in our house, we take some efforts to keep them somewhat isolated, and these measures have been usually successful.
The bathroom is the weak link in their routine as they continue to share it with siblings. This report reinforces us asking them to spray disinfectant.
Before we enacted some of these policies in our home, one kid getting a bug from school meant the entire family would get it. Now that's much less common.
No such conclusion is made, though.
TBH when my friend's dog links my face, I sometimes lick my lips. The odds of that making me stronger are 1000x the odds of it killing me. Mind you, I'm not going to lick a toilet bowl. But perhaps some minor exposure to such things isn't so bad in the broader sense?
Again, the species developed in a less than sterile environment, and suddenly we're going to clean that up and there are no unintended consequences?
People are chugging soda and eating over-processed food are...worried about flushing the toilet? Let's weigh the risks here.
Yes, and early death from disease was incredibly common.
The discovery of penicillin is estimated to have saved over 200 million lives.
fwiw, if we keep doling out antibiotics as we are, we'll be happy with only losing 200 million.
So again, are we making gains or grabbing a balloon?
I literally said "early death from disease". Do you need me to enumerate specifically which diseases penicillin was able to treat?
Your comments reek of survivorship bias. Just because we're alive today doesn't mean things weren't terrible before. Imagine how different the 14th century could have been if we had antibiotics to treat the bubonic plague.
You've gone hyperbolic to make a point - typical ofmn HN - that simply doesn't apply. It doesn't address the question. That question is - again - is too clean a good thing? (Hint: probably not).
Thanks for taking the time. But please, let's stay on topic. Thanks.
So is living in houses
Ignoring the fact that exposure may be a problem from E. coli to sewage, I read Robynne Chutkan's microbiome book at the suggestion of my doctor several years ago and nothing has come closer to the truth on our lack of exposure also being part of the problem.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. Try finding the median there and there's a Nobel waiting for you.
We always hear "People with pets live longer" and "couples live longer", right? While I can imagine the emotional value of those relationship and how it enables better health, my theory is that the constant presence of other microbiomes - human and/or pet - is also a major contributor to better health. Live alone? Without a pet? You aren't exposed as much.
p.s. Thanks for the book suggestion. I'll add them to my Wish List on ThriftBooks.com
Chutkan deserves the success she's had since that book shipped. The book is not an easy read. It requires a strong stomach, to say the least.
I was lucky to have a doctor who was thoughtful enough to connect my obsessions with diet and exercise to continuous improvement by leveraging my hyperlexia against the root cause that I have a stomach in each leg. ;)
I like your theory. It would be interesting to see a group of biology students debate the merits of such a theory and how they might prove or disprove such a theory.
I'm sure there are some game theory problems lurking there.
There are many sickness that basically don't exist anymore or are very rare, but used to be normal in the past.
I've read elsewhere today that anything under 95% vaccination will result in outbreaks; the r-naught is 12-18 if google is correct.
Masking.