very clean/sanitized environment = weaker immune system???

[Powder + park raider]

i saw on tv and it said that kids who grow up in a very sanitized environment have weaker immune systems. and obviously, weak immune system = gets sick easier.

but isn't this an oxymoron? we sanitize stuff so we don't get sick. but if everything is too clean, we get sick easier. but we can't just leave everything dirty, cuz we will also get sick. wtf?

[xlc_88]

If we live in a too clean environment, the good bacteria that are useful for our immune system are gone.

I also saw a video that discussed farm-raised children having better immune systems than city-raised children. The idea is farm-raised children are exposed to natural pathogens in their environment early on in life and thus have a stronger immune system that can handle more dangerous pathogens later in life.

[Tornado F2]

It should be obvious. Just look what has happened to the populations of isolated communities when germ-carrying (but otherwise healthy) strangers came to town.

[Tornado F2]

If we live in a too clean environment, the good bacteria that are useful for our immune system are gone.

I also saw a video that discussed farm-raised children having better immune systems than city-raised children. The idea is farm-raised children are exposed to natural pathogens in their environment early on in life and thus have a stronger immune system that can handle more dangerous pathogens later in life.

Just look at cowpox/smallpox for a good example of this.

[Powder + park raider]

makes sense, but so everyone should infect themselves with HIV then later everyone will be HIV immune?

[spike1128]

makes sense, but so everyone should infect themselves with HIV then later everyone will be HIV immune?

That's the most uneducated comment I have ever read. It's HIV for crying out loud, you are done if you contract this.

The exposure of bacteria / virus only work well on mild type of disease. It's almost like saying you want to be have exposure to Ebola (air borne type infection) to gain immunity from it. You only gain immunity when you don't die from the disease lol!.

Back to the original question, yes, immune system is weaker if you are always in a clean sterile environment. Breathing in filtered air can cause immune system to go down. It has nothing to do with good bacteria or bad bacteria like the other poster has suggested.

[Powder + park raider]

That's the most uneducated comment I have ever read. It's HIV for crying out loud, you are done if you contract this.

actually you are the uneducated one. in some parts of the world, some people are naturally immune to HIV.

[dragon_drift]

actually you are the uneducated one. in some parts of the world, some people are naturally immune to HIV.

That gene is only in Scandinavia.

[xlc_88]

Just look at cowpox/smallpox for a good example of this.

How is smallpox a good example? The disease is eradicated.


makes sense, but so everyone should infect themselves with HIV then later everyone will be HIV immune?

Do you even know what HIV is? :facepalm:


That's the most uneducated comment I have ever read. It's HIV for crying out loud, you are done if you contract this.

The exposure of bacteria / virus only work well on mild type of disease. It's almost like saying you want to be have exposure to Ebola (air borne type infection) to gain immunity from it. You only gain immunity when you don't die from the disease lol!.

Back to the original question, yes, immune system is weaker if you are always in a clean sterile environment. Breathing in filtered air can cause immune system to go down. It has nothing to do with good bacteria or bad bacteria like the other poster has suggested.

But then you are suggesting that unfiltered air is beneficial. Natural pathogens (good and bad) in the air aid in increasing our immunity.

[Tornado F2]

makes sense, but so everyone should infect themselves with HIV then later everyone will be HIV immune?

Anybody that survives might be. But that won't be many at all. Best not to do something insanely stupid like that.

[Tornado F2]

How is smallpox a good example? The disease is eradicated.


Google it, or otherwise read up on how they developed a cure. Dairy maids turned out to be key.

[Tornado F2]

actually you are the uneducated one. in some parts of the world, some people are naturally immune to HIV.

That's probably because they're already dead.

I'm not sure that anybody is actually "immune" to HIV, even though some may be slower to display symptoms than others.

[rabbit]

Didn't you hear/watch HG Wells' War of the Worlds?

[jperras]

My uneducated logic is this: Beyond a certain age, sterile environments are good. When you catch a cold or contract something (not HIV lol!) as a 10 year old, I believe this is a good thing as it gets the immune system up and running against common illnesses that are present in the world. But say you are 30 years old. Catching anything then I don't really thing your body is able to develop new immunities towards anything by then. Just look to Native Indians in the past as an example.

Having said that, from 0-1 years and the senior years would stand most to benefit from sterile environments IMHO. My anecdotal evidence suggest those who were allowed to get dirty when they were younger fair better later in life.

[zz000ter]

Your immune system is like an athlete.

Germs invading your body (dirty environment) keep the immune system training and in top condition

Once the athlete stops training he turns into a fat slob. Same for your immune system

It has been shown that children that grow up on farms or in city with multiple pets have significantly lower amount of allergies than do children that grow up in the city with no pets (clean environment)

jperras - your body is always developing immunities to germs. The problem with the cold is that it is a constantly changing virus (or set of viruses).

[longitude]

Yes, but don't act and live like a pig.

Have decency, wash your hands before meals, take regular showers and if you're sick, then back off.

[D-Roc]

This is something I have been commenting on for years. I do not use sanatizer. I clean as messes come up. I find that my family and I do not get sick as often as some of the other kids/families we know and they are the ones that are constantly cleaning and use sanitizer several times a day.

I touch the door handles in public. I just grab a shopping cart and go. Germs are a part of life.

[UrbanPoet]

Its all in your head!
In a food court you see 99% of people going straight from the take out line, to the dining tables.
Yet there aren't epidemics of watery poo.

Look @ the food court washrooms... Whenever I go to pee or wash my hands. I never see people just going in to wash their hands before dining!

Keep a clean house, but I think the whole 'anti-bacterial everything' is a bit over kill. But I'm kind of a hypocrit... i'm a anti-bacterial everything kinda guy.
But thats only because in my line of work I see A LOT Of gross filth and hoarding. It just helps me sleep at night.

[Powder + park raider]

That's probably because they're already dead.

I'm not sure that anybody is actually "immune" to HIV, even though some may be slower to display symptoms than others.

no seriously, some people have this mutation in their genes so HIV can't enter their cells and do damage. read up on it.

[45ED]

There's a George Carlin skit for this...

[Powder + park raider]

There's a George Carlin skit for this...

got a link?

[Sauerkraut]

There's a George Carlin skit for this...

Yup, about growing up in NYC and swimming in the East river. It's not a Disney version, so no links here

[bionicbadger]

of course. this is why you get immunizations/booster shots, so your body is exposed and can prepare anti-bodies.

Farm kids are almost always healthier and don't have as many allergies as city kids.

[kabza]

It should be obvious. Just look what has happened to the populations of isolated communities when germ-carrying (but otherwise healthy) strangers came to town.

Are you talking about the native Indians?

[Tornado F2]

no seriously, some people have this mutation in their genes so HIV can't enter their cells and do damage. read up on it.

You can read a lot of things on the internet. That doesn't mean they're true. Even if a few people actually do have immunity, for the VAST majority of people HIV is fatal. I think it's fair to say that almost everybody on RFD, including you and I, would die if we contracted the disease. Expensive meds can prolong sufferers' life, but by far the best bet is to avoid contracting HIV in the first place. It's really not all that hard to do.

[Tornado F2]

Are you talking about the native Indians?

They would be one example, but certainly not the only ones.

BTW, they never were "Indian". Real Indians, from the subcontinent, had likely been exposed to practically every germ known to man, given their central location, and would have built up natural immunities.

[Tornado F2]

My uneducated logic is this: Beyond a certain age, sterile environments are good. When you catch a cold or contract something (not HIV lol!) as a 10 year old, I believe this is a good thing as it gets the immune system up and running against common illnesses that are present in the world. But say you are 30 years old. Catching anything then I don't really thing your body is able to develop new immunities towards anything by then. Just look to Native Indians in the past as an example.

Having said that, from 0-1 years and the senior years would stand most to benefit from sterile environments IMHO. My anecdotal evidence suggest those who were allowed to get dirty when they were younger fair better later in life.

"Uneducated" being the key word there. :D

Age really doesn't have much, if anything, to do with it. General physical health is far more important.

Babies usually have immunities that they inherited from their mothers, which cover them in their early years. Older people, even those over 30(!), still have the ability to constantly develop resistance to new germs. It just takes time, but I don't believe that is age-related.

As for Native Americans (I hate the term "Indian" for anybody who doesn't originate from the subcontinent - it's so outdated and ignorant), most of them that died from newly-introduced Eurasian germs were actually in good health previously, often less than 30 or 40 (life expectancy wasn't very long then, regardless of germs). Age really wasn't a factor.

[danfromwaterloo]

Exposure to bacteria and viruses is a good thing. For the most part, beating up on beatable microbes helps your immune system stay strong and healthy. The problems occur when your system encounters viruses that leave dormant copies around (think herpes, HPV, Epstein-Barr, etc). These viruses never leave your body once infected and are also suspected of triggering the mutations in cells that lead to various cancers.

[xlc_88]

"Uneducated" being the key word there. :D

Age really doesn't have much, if anything, to do with it. General physical health is far more important.

Babies usually have immunities that they inherited from their mothers, which cover them in their early years. Older people, even those over 30(!), still have the ability to constantly develop resistance to new germs. It just takes time, but I don't believe that is age-related.

As for Native Americans (I hate the term "Indian" for anybody who doesn't originate from the subcontinent - it's so outdated and ignorant), most of them that died from newly-introduced Eurasian germs were actually in good health previously, often less than 30 or 40 (life expectancy wasn't very long then, regardless of germs). Age really wasn't a factor.

But these "new" germs that you so speak of, the Europeans had to fight off these diseases themselves as well. The Europeans were not in good health after contacting smallpox. Nor is smallpox a natural pathogen that can we can build up immunity to AND pass on to our children. If the smallpox disease was to reappear in the human population, I don't think we would have enough vaccinations to vaccinate the entire human population in time.

This is similar to other diseases such as influenza and measles (which the Europeans also brought to North America). We cannot pass our immunity to our children for such diseases and vaccinations are required such as the MMR vaccine for measles.

Most of these newly-introduced European germs were not natural pathogens. In fact, most of these "germs" emerged due to poor sanitary conditions found in Europe during that time that had devasting effects on Europe's population (e.g. Bubonic Plague).

[sandikosh]

This is so odd. I know parents who would take their month old child everywhere so their baby can buuild their immune system. Then after a few years, forbid them from doing anything that will get them sick!