Live data from Hacker News

Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

med.stanford.edu

101–110 of 159 posts

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can work the other way, too. Your offspring may be more likely to survive if you stop consuming resources once they become viable.

Are you sure that availability of resources was a limiting factor during a large part of human evolution? ie what has driven human population growth - a fundamental change in availability of natural resources or a fundamental change in how humans exploited them? I'd argue it's the latter, and that's driven by accumulated knowledge - and before writing - the key repository of that was - old people.

Humans have selective adaptations to reduce resource competition between older and younger members of populations - examples are menopause and testosterone levels.

Part of the reason it benefited us that some but not all people become old is because people require more attention during two phases of their lives. Our biological evolution has prioritized care for the very young over the very old, with respect to a limit on resources (like attention), effectively until the modern age. In some cultures, for instance, those with teeth must pre-chew food for those without, or expected members to engage in ritual suicide at a certain age.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#102
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There only needs to not be a reason we need it to survive long enough to reproduce. Humans had life expectancy even shorter than our fertility period until recently and they developed as social species hundreds of thousands years ago, for which living beyond fertility period is beneficial (grandparents were invented by evolution too). > And bear in mind that most people don't have a problem surviving colds That’s mo…

> That’s modern people with access to antibiotics etc. Antibiotics don't help against viruses like colds. And we live a life that is has a higher degree of social connectivity than our ancestors, allowing for faster spreading of disease, so we're arguably worse off.

>Antibiotics don't help against viruses like colds

Yes. But they help fighting secondary infections, which are common.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#103
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There only needs to not be a reason we need it to survive long enough to reproduce. Humans had life expectancy even shorter than our fertility period until recently and they developed as social species hundreds of thousands years ago, for which living beyond fertility period is beneficial (grandparents were invented by evolution too). > And bear in mind that most people don't have a problem surviving colds That’s mo…

If you made it to fertility age your life expectancy was much longer.

Yes, and to get there we use immunity that is activated on demand. Clearly that was better from evolutionary perspective than preactivation or always-on.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#104
post #100

This seems too good to be true. Respiratory infections kill and debilitate a lot of people. If cranking up the innate immune system all the time reduced illness with no downsides, you'd think evolution would have done it already, but it didn't, which makes me think there's probably a downside, and the fact that the innate immune system is only cranked up when a pathogen is detected is probably because the downside is…

> cranking up the innate immune system all the time reduced illness with no downsides But isn't that what the adjuants that are currently in nearly every vaccine do anyway. That is forcing the triggering of immune response when there wouldn't be none or very little response naturally?

That’s adaptive rather than innate, as the article makes clear.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#105
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or worse. If it is so easy to activate, there must be an evolutionary reason why we don’t have it.

I think you have evolution backwards. There only needs to not be a reason we need it to survive long enough to reproduce. Or more probabilistically, there needs to not be a significant reproductive benefit to it. And bear in mind that most people don't have a problem surviving colds and the like long enough to reproduce even with no vaccines at all, and that was probably more true for much of our evolutionary history…

At scale, yes. Because human males have significantly longer fertility periods than females, the specific adaptations of men who are healthier into later life can be passed onto offspring. The same applies to women who reach menopause while they're still healthy are able to continue caring for family without the risk of expanding the population, albeit for their offspring.

While human evolution is not predictive, it has selected for a wide variety of survival-associated adaptations beyond the mere individual.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can work the other way, too. Your offspring may be more likely to survive if you stop consuming resources once they become viable.

Are you sure that availability of resources was a limiting factor during a large part of human evolution? ie what has driven human population growth - a fundamental change in availability of natural resources or a fundamental change in how humans exploited them? I'd argue it's the latter, and that's driven by accumulated knowledge - and before writing - the key repository of that was - old people.

The vast majority of human evolution happened in non-humans

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on how bad it is for you, I can recommend thinking about turbinectomy. Had it done due to chronic, allergy related swellings, and it was life changing.

TIL! I have dust mite allergies, how will this help?

Have you considered just doing hyposensibilization therapy? No reason to go the way of surgery before trying that. Worked wonders for me and my array of allergies, dust mites among them.
Post reply on HN