Don't know why you were down voted - I take your position to mean "has lockdown led to a loss of general immunity due to lack of exposure to general pathogens" which I think is a valid question to ask.

Seems some people are too trigger happy and unwilling to explore charitable interpretation of posts.

Precisely, it’s not as if we don’t know from other pandemics that the second wave is almost always more severe... I’m not suggesting we go full Sweden and start coughing on each other in the sauna, but there are lots of factors we are struggling to account for in all this.

The answer is probably "we don't know." The closest example I can think of for this is what the immune systems of ISS astronauts look like after 6 months in orbit.

Listening to epidemiologists alone was/is a bad choice because they study the spread of disease. You also to consider long-term effects on the immune system, the economy, education, social structure, politics.

The second-order effects have already been surprising:

- Social unrest in the US - China restricting freedoms in Hong Kong - Bifurcated "K" economy - Covid case surges in countries that "did it right" with hard lockdowns

It's a bad theory with no medical evidence.

The article and your wondering doesn't provide enough evidence that we should go counter to not trying to spread the virus in the first place. Social distancing, hygiene and a vaccine are much more definitive ways to combat a severe second wave than hoping magically some people have built-in immunity or some unknown environmental trigger results in a similar immune response.

The parent never suggested anything anti-lockdown. At face value it is merely questioning the existence of a possible trade off of lockdown. As you've not provided evidence or anecdotal stories to refute the question I'm still in no better position to consider the parent's question with more information.

I mean if we really want to start projecting our own agendas or anti agendas, the whole notion of "evidence" leaves a bad taste in my mouth given the WHO went on record saying "there is no evidence of human transmission". And I am saying this as a scientist!

Our obsession with evidence and data is important (as what are we without empiricism) but boy has it seemed more like a curse rather than a blessing at various stages throughout this pandemic. I am definitely team Bayes on these matters, common sense and experience do hold some value sometimes.

Germ theory and the science around vaccines is well established. Winging it because maybe some unknown might protect us sounds absurd. To get to the point where the existence of this unknown can be proven yes/no will take longer than it will to develop a vaccine.

I never questioned germ theory nor the science of vaccines.

I do raise an eyebrow however when there's so much rigmarole around "evidence" and mask wearing. Just like there was rigmarole around hand washing when Semmelweis promoted it. What a bizarre hill people have made to die on.

And how slow the WHO were to declare the dangers of covid in its early stages.