> Its important to note that Immunity debt is a concept that anti lockdown activists created in 2020. It was not in medical texts before that point, it never had any science behind it. It was a political term used to end mitigations against Covid not a scientific fact.

No. It's a hypothesis, because nobody had any explanation for why flu "disappeared". You may not prefer that particular hypothesis, but that does not make it unscientific or political.

In fact, doing what you're doing right now -- trying to present the hypothesis as activism in order to remove it from the realm of reasonable discussion -- is inherently political.

> Covid especially so it damages the immune system directly suppressing CD4 and 8 T cells, B cells and other aspects.

There is no good evidence for this claim. We have robust T- and B-cell mediated immunity to prior Covid infection, and there are now hundreds, if not thousands of papers showing it. Please stop.

The general origin of this meme is the article linked in the piece, which, if you read the abstract you'll see is making a very limited claim about early infection, and cannot be used to support the notion that "Covid damages the immune system" in any long-term sense, particularly when we know the opposite is true from many, many other studies:

https://academic.oup.com/jleukbio/article-abstract/116/6/138...

I don't like to resort to appeal to authority, but the article quotes Ashish Jha (hardly a Covid minimizer) as dismissing the "immune damage" narrative:

> Ashish Jha, former White House covid-19 response coordinator under President Biden, has publicly rejected this hypothesis. “There’s a lot of bad information out there about how covid-19 damages the immune system. It really doesn’t,” he posted on X in early 2024. More than a year later, his view is unchanged.

https://x.com/ashishkjha/status/1747412684889354266

>nobody had any explanation for why flu "disappeared"

The flu didn't disappear, and we know very well why it almost disappeared: it is far less contagious than SARS-CoV-2, and masking and the huge dip in international travel stopped it.

>It's a hypothesis

Here in Switzerland (and in France), it hasn't been presented by pediatrics societies as an hypothesis at all, but as a fact and the main argument to reopen immediately. It has also been used again and again to explain the huge waves of infections of many illnesses that surged after the end of lockdowns, and absolutely none of them ever quoted that "immune debt is just an hypothesis", and none of them have suggested any other alternative hypothesis such as "SARS-CoV-2 has a detrimental effect on the immune system or health in general".

Because to admit so would be to admit the mass infection of children had been a massive mistake on their part.

>I don't like to resort to appeal to authority, but the article quotes Ashish Jha (hardly a Covid minimizer) as dismissing the "immune damage" narrative

And Jha has no explanation for the increased, sustained (and now synchronised) waves of infections and illnesses that are plain to see. He has nothing. This is the fiasco of "masks aren't proven to work" again.

> No. It's a hypothesis, because nobody had any explanation for why flu "disappeared". You may not prefer that particular hypothesis, but that does not make it unscientific or political.

I hypothesize the rise in these less common infections is none other than Santa Claus. You may not prefer that particular hypothesis, but that does not make it unscientific.....the fact that it's complete made up bullshit that, like the parent says of the "immunity debt" concept, "never had any science behind it.", is what makes it unscientific. That it's made up and was never shown by any evidence.