Having read Clare Craig, in my mind I am still entertaining the hypothesis that direct infection is not much of an issue. Infected people just supply the world with virus particles. What happens in the population might be almost completely determined by susceptibility, and this depends on season (vitamin D may play a role here, of course), state of the immune system, competition between different viruses, and maybe factors that we are not even aware of.
For the artificial (lab-created) infections, flu was "caught" ~4 times in 10 -- if you consider that that many people out of 10 got respiratory symptoms after their experimental inoculations. From a crude probabilistic standpoint, you're more likely not to catch flu than to catch flu -- if researchers shoot copies of flu virus up your nose or down your throat.
With secondary infections in homes (secondary attack rates), you are also more likely -- up to 100 times more likely -- not to catch it than to catch it (left side of Figure 2).
The UV lamp should work out for you. A full-spectrum of sunlight type is likely good (contains the vital UVB light needed*). You may have to experiment with it to discover your "half-MED" -- half of the time taken to redden your skin. At doses (exposure times) of one-half-MED, you get good effects without any burning, which can increase the risk of skin cancer.
*The wavelength of 280-315 nanometers is needed, but for health reasons, full-spectrum sunlight-type may be even better. Greater skin exposure at less exposure time is better than small skin exposure for long periods of time.
Having read Clare Craig, in my mind I am still entertaining the hypothesis that direct infection is not much of an issue. Infected people just supply the world with virus particles. What happens in the population might be almost completely determined by susceptibility, and this depends on season (vitamin D may play a role here, of course), state of the immune system, competition between different viruses, and maybe factors that we are not even aware of.
Thank you!
Is catching involved?
For the artificial (lab-created) infections, flu was "caught" ~4 times in 10 -- if you consider that that many people out of 10 got respiratory symptoms after their experimental inoculations. From a crude probabilistic standpoint, you're more likely not to catch flu than to catch flu -- if researchers shoot copies of flu virus up your nose or down your throat.
With secondary infections in homes (secondary attack rates), you are also more likely -- up to 100 times more likely -- not to catch it than to catch it (left side of Figure 2).
The viruses are just scared of you.
The UV lamp should work out for you. A full-spectrum of sunlight type is likely good (contains the vital UVB light needed*). You may have to experiment with it to discover your "half-MED" -- half of the time taken to redden your skin. At doses (exposure times) of one-half-MED, you get good effects without any burning, which can increase the risk of skin cancer.
*The wavelength of 280-315 nanometers is needed, but for health reasons, full-spectrum sunlight-type may be even better. Greater skin exposure at less exposure time is better than small skin exposure for long periods of time.
We can agree to disagree regarding that link, which has the effect of scaring people away from vitamin D supplements.
I won't say more about that link, unless you prompt me.