Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Genetic susceptibility plays a significant role in outcome.
|
Not sure what you mean by "genetic susceptibility," a term that seems meant to confuse. If you are a man, does that itself make you "genetically susceptible" to testicular cancer? If you had XX instead XY chromosomes, you wouldn't get the disease.
Quote:
|
And young healthy people who are doing badly likely share a common or similar genetic feature which renders them susceptible to bad outcome.
|
This, I think, is the crux of the disagreement. You've said nothing that supports this hypothesis, and you've professed an inability to think of any other possible cause. If there's something in all those links that you shared that explains this better than you have so far, please share it (but I'm not going to read the results of your Google search if you can't be bothered to do it yourself and point to the key bits).
Quote:
|
The environment argument is a dodge. If you are young and because of your environment you are sick, you are not young and healthy.
|
I have been unclear. I mean "environment" as a short-hand for all the things that affect how the disease finds you that aren't genetics. A healthy person who works in a crowded space with poor air circulation may get exposed to a lot of virus relatively to an equally healthy person who works outside -- both may get sick, but the disease may have a completely different course, for reasons that are environmental.
And also, luck. Some people get really sick and then the recover. Others don't. It's a mystery.
