[autokad]

I use to get the flu 1 or 2 times a year. I started going out in more crowded areas, going to pub, etc, and I haven't had a cold or flu in 4 years.

I don't know the article knows as much as they think they do about health, because using muscles also damages them. I been nursing a bicep injury for the last 4 months.

I get its not a prefect analogy, but nothing is, else it would be the same thing

I don't think people should go licking railings, but total avoidance of germs is quite harmful. that's a fact.

[voisin]

> total avoidance of germs is quite harmful

This isn’t the argument being made in the article.

[TexanFeller]

I did this for covid. The second my vaccine kicked in I dropped all precautions and started staying indoors with as many people as possible for as long as possible, basically trying to never go a day without a small exposure. I’ve tested for infection a number of times and a university study tested my antibodies periodically for a year and I’ve never had a detectable case. Continuous exposure to small amounts of the virus seems to have kept me more free from infection than those that took significant precautions. I’m not just reckless, I used to have severe OCD, so living carefully with lots of precautions is actually more dangerous for me than the virus.

[bjoli]

So, another anecdote: I have COVID right now. I have had a bunch of self tests at home, and have tested myself every single time I have had any kind of cold or fever.

Despite me getting on a crammed bus every morning and afternoon to go working in the same room as about 80 other people 4 days a week I didn't get COVID (that I know of) until now.

Sometimes we are just lucky. Maybe the vaccine worked better-than-average for us. Maybe the route of infection works less well for us. Maybe we had it without noticing it at all

[EricE]

PCR tests also love to give false positives...

[BobAliceInATree]

Maybe, but it's only really an issue if there's low-prevalence of covid at the moment of testing (bayesian probability).

But it's also easy to test multiple times, and often enough the symptoms will confirm it.

[bjoli]

I am pretty sure it is the opposite. I used antigen tests which are less reliable.

I did not mean to confirm the parent, but give a version that is similar but probably just chance.

[croes]

Rarely, false negatives are way more likely than false positives.

[BobAliceInATree]

How do you know you're being continuously exposed with "small amount"?

You don't.

You probably haven't been exposed at all, or you're one of the lucky asymptomatic people.

For example, I live in a major city, and am constantly around people post-vaccine. Yet I've had Covid 3x since them.

You can't draw the conclusion you're making from your behavior in public, as there's so many other likely possibilities.

[TexanFeller]

I also live in a large city, in TX, so I most definitely had regular exposures.

Whether asymptomatic or not infected at all seems like a distinction without a difference. Either way I didn’t miss work, vacations, or get noticeably harmed. The whole point of my strategy was to expose my immune system to germs it was well equipped to fight off quickly and expose it continuously so I didn’t encounter it after it had mutated too much to be recognized.

I’m well aware of the pitfalls of anecdata, I just thought my approach was different enough from what most people did to be worth sharing. There will be no studies to test my strategy, so all we can have is my anecdotes.

[psd1]

Sorry to be that guy, but: _biceps_

I lost this battle long ago, didn't I...