Over the past three years or so, there have been fewer opportunities for exposure to the flu virus, which has now made it easier for infections to spread, especially among younger generations who have less immunity to the virus.

Ahh yes, the irony of trying to prevent Covid.

A longer influenza season is part of the expected consequences of relaxing the measures against respiratory infections, fortunately not everything is as unsustainable as isolation for example, children can be protected from the worst of the disease by keeping a good nutrition, doing plenty of exercise and by immunizations. And for those with a special vulnerability to respiratory problems strict hygienic measures and wearing masks can help a lot in preventing infection in the first place.

Have been wondering if the hyper vigilance of the past few years due to corona, mask wearing, less physical contact etc has had an effect on the immune system at large. Our school got hit hard by the flu this year, even the sports teams who are in peak physical condition got hit hard. Many were saying it was much worse than Covid.

Question , have we actually weakened our immune system by wearing masks and isolating or is this just a particularly nasty strain of the flu trying to stay relevant?

The fear factor even? Hyper vigilance comes back to bite?

There has been quite a large explosion in cases of the flu the last few months. Shows that it’s always around even out of season. It’s particularly doing work in schools across Japan at the moment.

Going hard on certain Covid measures and suddenly stopping them such as fewer masks, disinfecting gels and more shows that a little personal hygiene helps stave off illness.

The Flu is kept at bay by mask wearing. Children don't wear masks.

Question , have we actually weakened our immune system by wearing masks and isolating or is this just a particularly nasty strain of the flu trying to stay relevant?

That's a very good question

I'm also wondering if there is any chance this year's flu has mutated with covid to form that nasty strain?

I'm not a doctor so I don't know. Is that even possible?

Aly, whatever it was mate, people were dropping like flies. It spread like wildfire too. Three, even four, days of abject misery. Athletes too. of course these kids and students spend ALOT of time together but the severity was well noted. What gives?

no clue matey

But its scary stuff

The maniac push to continually vaccinate a segment of the population not at risk of any great harm has surely compromised natural immunity.

Masking and alcohol disinfection multiple times a day has also added to the risk of natural immunity developing in younger populations

Ah yes - ANYTHING to normalize endless masking in Japan.

Question , have we actually weakened our immune system by wearing masks and isolating or is this just a particularly nasty strain of the flu trying to stay relevant?

Neither, people have fully working immunity, which do not work against pathogens they were not exposed to. This ist the expected result from having less exposure to this particular virus for a time. If the problem was immunity in general then the incidence rates for infections and complications of all other infectious diseases would also increase, something that is not observed.

I'm also wondering if there is any chance this year's flu has mutated with covid to form that nasty strain?

Completely different viruses that do not share even the form of their genomes, Influenza virus have negative stranded RNA divided in several segments, while coronaviruses have positive stranded RNA in a single long chain.

The maniac push to continually vaccinate a segment of the population not at risk of any great harm has surely compromised natural immunity.

No it did not, at all. That is just false antivaxxer propaganda well debunked by the experts, as mentioned, if this was true then ALL infections would be much higher, not just the one that was completely expected to rebound after measures against respiratory infections were abandoned.

Masking and alcohol disinfection multiple times a day has also added to the risk of natural immunity developing in younger populations

Any source that says this has a significative effect? specially one that surpasses the benefits obtained from the measures? If not, then there is no point to the criticism because the same could be said about every hygienic measure, from showering to washing your food before consuming it.

virusrex- thank you for your informed answer as usual.

Question , have we actually weakened our immune system by wearing masks and isolating

Probably. Our immune system should be regularly exposed to pathogens. The exposure most of us have regularly had before the "pandemic" has been greatly reduced over the past 3 years.

Probably

On the opposite, it is extremely unlikely. If that was the case (a general weakening of the immune system) then every kind of infection would be more common (and likely to complicate). Something that is obviously not happening. People are regularly exposed to countless pathogens even while measures against respiratory infections are in place.

This particular pathogen is much more susceptible to those measures and once they are abandoned it is logical to expect a rebound of all the people that up until now were not exposed to it. No need to imagine reasons why every other kind pathogen is still being controlled by the immunity even if it is supposedly not working properly, the clear conclusion is that the immunity is the same as always, people were just not exposed to influenza.

We're pretty much saying the same thing...

A longer influenza season is part of the expected consequences of relaxing the measures against respiratory infections, fortunately not everything is as unsustainable as isolation for example, children can be protected from the worst of the disease by keeping a good nutrition, doing plenty of exercise and by immunizations. And for those with a special vulnerability to respiratory problems strict hygienic measures and wearing masks can help a lot in preventing infection in the first place.

Complete hearsay. Fake quasi-medical advice too.

Come on.

We're pretty much saying the same thing...

Not at all, weakening the immune system is completely different from not being exposed to one single pathogen. The immunity is working in a perfectly normal way, without any drop of function, just not working against this specific virus becaue there was no reason to do it. It makes as much sense as saying that not being infected with Yellow Fever thanks to control of the mosquitoes is making the immunity weaker. Even if the mosquitoes (and the viral infection) becomes common again that is not an argument to say the immune system was affected.

Complete hearsay. Fake quasi-medical advice too.

That is not hearsay, is even included in the quote from the perfectly well identified medical professional that gives as reason the lower exposition to the virus. Hearsay is to say something like "my father is a doctor and says this is wrong" because the person that supposedly said something is never identified and no proof is given that the claim was even said.

Do you have any reference that proves that saying keeping a good nutrition, excercise and immunization is "fake quasi-medical advice"? else you are just making baseless accusations.

We're pretty much saying the same thing...

Not at all, weakening the immune system is completely different from not being exposed to one single pathogen. The immunity is working in a perfectly normal way, without any drop of function,

Yeah, just like someone who doesn't exercise will be physically weaker than an athlete, though both will have perfectly normal functioning muscles.

Seems we each have a different definition of "weak"; perhaps your definition of "weak" is closer to that of "defective".

So we were pretty much saying the same thing...

But hey, feel free to split hairs if it makes you happy.

Oh, and by the way, I never said that over the past three years, it was only one single pathogen that we were less exposed to. The pandemic measures decreased our exposure to multiple pathogens...

Yeah, just like someone who doesn't exercise will be physically weaker than an athlete, though both will have perfectly normal functioning muscles.

No, not at all because the immunity has not dropped in general as evidenced by the lack of increased incidence for all infections in general, the example clearly contradicts your explanation.

Seems we each have a different definition of "weak"; perhaps your definition of "weak" is closer to that of "defective".

If the immunity in general is "weak" how come it is then as effective as usual for every other kind of infection?

So we were pretty much saying the same thing...

Again no, because you are making an invalid generalization for something that happens only specifically and not in general.

Oh, and by the way, I never said that over the past three years, it was only one single pathogen that we were less exposed to.

That is the problem, that this pathogen is the one seeing a reemergence, something that would not be the case with a general drop on immunity, then it would be all of them. That this specific case is happening only means this specific kind of immunity was not developed because it was never stimulated, but the immunity in general is as capable and healthy as usual.

The pandemic measures decreased our exposure to multiple pathogens...

Taking into account the huge variety of pathogens that we are exposed during daily life this also explains why the immunity in general has not dropped. A few respiratory viruses do not represent a significant portion of the stimulation the immunity is subjected.

Taking into account the huge variety of pathogens that we are exposed during daily life this also explains why the immunity in general has not dropped. A few respiratory viruses do not represent a significant portion of the stimulation the immunity is subjected.

Not true, and the reason is exactly how the other poster clearly explained.

Hearsay is to say something like "my father is a doctor and says this is wrong" because the person that supposedly said something is never identified and no proof is given that the claim was even said.

Maybe, if someone gave that argument.

You have better examples of your hearsay in your numerous posts here, in addition to your "the experts say so" without ever stating who the experts are and without having personal knowledge of who the experts are,

Not true, and the reason is exactly how the other poster clearly explained.

What evidence do you have to claim this is not true? it should be obvious that reasons already debunked are not valid, and just claiming influenza is the only pathogen people are ever exposed do not make any sense.

Maybe, if someone gave that argument.

And since nobody has used this kind of argument it is clear your accusation is meaningless, the opinion of a well identified experts in the article do not constitute hearsay.

You have better examples of your hearsay in your numerous posts here, in addition to your "the experts say so" without ever stating who the experts are and without having personal knowledge of who the experts are,

First, that does absolutely nothing to support your accusation that this case was hearsay (since it was easy to prove it was not), and providing sources is a very easy way to refute your accusation about unrelated posts.