After the lifting of lockdowns, there has been a noticeable uptick in infections, particularly among children, which has led to a surge in public discourse. Many are questioning whether this phenomenon is a result of an "immunity debt" accrued during the lockdowns, where reduced exposure to infections led to weakened immunity.

Conversely, some experts argue against the immunity debt theory, suggesting that “immunity theft” caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus may be a more accurate explanation for these infection spikes. Others believe that immunity debt simply reflects diminished population immunity due to lockdowns in the years prior. Let’s delve deeper into these conflicting viewpoints.

The Surge in Infections Post-Lockdown

Between September 2022 and April 2023, the U.K. saw a near doubling in cases of group A streptococcus (GAS) infections compared to the previous high season (54,394 vs. 30,768). Tragically, this resulted in 401 fatalities, including 47 children, compared to 354 deaths (27 children) from the preceding season.

In children, GAS typically manifests as scarlet fever, characterized by high fever and a distinctive rash. In older adults, however, it can lead to severe complications, including necrotizing fasciitis and streptococcal toxic shock syndrome, especially when it infects critical areas like the bloodstream or lungs.

Following the end of lockdowns in mid-2021, there was a remarkable increase in respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cases in children across various countries, including the U.S., Australia, and Germany. Pediatric hospitals in the U.S. were overwhelmed for weeks, and Germany recorded a historical surge in RSV rates, with incidence increasing 25-50 times compared to pre-pandemic levels. Even into 2023, RSV cases continued to rise in Australia.

Lockdowns had previously cut RSV incidence by an extraordinary 98% during the winter of 2020 in New Zealand, a period typically marked by high RSV rates. Without exposure to RSV, immunity couldn't develop, and vaccination against RSV remained a distant prospect until approval for older individuals in May 2023.

Additionally, flu cases surged in the U.K., doubling in 2021 relative to 2018-2019 figures. Canada experienced a sudden influx of flu cases, forcing hospitals to accommodate two children in rooms meant for one in late 2022.

Following the strict Covid preventive measures, other infections like chickenpox, gastroenteritis, and severe bacterial infections also reemerged among children. These infections, predominantly spread through respiratory routes, saw a significant decline during Covid restrictions, but their resurgence was anticipated once those measures were lifted.

Controversies Surrounding Immunity Debt

Several reputable media outlets have criticized the concept of immunity debt as "misguided" and "dangerous," claiming it misrepresents the beneficial effects of infections on the immune system and suggests that Covid measures were more harmful than helpful.

In a piece for the Financial Times, journalist Anjana Ahuja stated, “The discussion surrounding immunity debt illustrates how a seemingly plausible theory can propagate misinformation.” Critics argue that attributing the resurgence of infections solely to Covid preventive measures oversimplifies the complex interplay of factors influencing public health.

Some proponents of the immunity debt theory contend that the lack of exposure to viruses like RSV due to lockdowns resulted in waning immunity among children. As society returns to normal, children are encountering these viruses all at once, leading to a spike in hospitalizations, particularly for RSV, which is often most severe during initial infections. Furthermore, mothers who avoided RSV during the pandemic missed developing protective antibodies for their infants.

However, some experts view immunity debt as a misleading concept. Introduced in a 2021 position paper by the Pediatric Infectious Disease Group in France, the term gained traction despite lacking substantial scientific backing prior to the pandemic. Critics like Dr. Lisa Iannattone have raised questions about the validity of the hypothesis, noting that its originator had previously made controversial claims about Covid-19 transmission among children.

The Concept of Immunity Theft

In contrast, the theory of immunity theft posits that SARS-CoV-2 disrupts the immune response, leaving individuals more susceptible to other infections. Some experts argue this may be a more plausible explanation for the spikes in infections than immunity debt.

Dr. Anthony Leonardi suggests that SARS-CoV-2 can exhaust T-cells, which play a crucial role in the adaptive immune response against viruses and cancer. This theory is supported by observations of dysregulated T-cells in Covid-19 patients.

Nevertheless, some researchers challenge the validity of the immunity theft hypothesis. A comprehensive study indicated no significant immune changes in Covid-19 survivors within six weeks of symptom onset. As noted by Dr. Michael Rose, while some changes were observed in T-cell function, they were not substantial enough to suggest increased vulnerability to infections.

Conclusion: A Complex Reality

The debate between immunity debt and theft reflects the polarized views surrounding vaccines and public health measures. Proponents of immunity debt often place blame on lockdowns and masks, while those favoring immunity theft attribute the situation to the virus itself.

In truth, the relationship between these two concepts is likely multifaceted. Both immunity debt and theft could play roles in the resurgence of infections, alongside other factors such as relaxed health measures and the evolution of pathogens.

If you have read this far, thank you. To stay updated, consider subscribing to my Medium email list. If you're interested in becoming a member for unlimited access to Medium, feel free to use my referral link. Your generosity is appreciated!