Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

med.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 159 posts

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#131

Post by CGMthrowaway »

jml78 wrote: post #119
chewbacha wrote: post #114

This is cool but I’m sorry, that’s not a vaccine - it’s a prophylactic. A vaccine or inoculation is named because it creates a sustained adaptation to a targeted antigen. Something that boosts immune response is not an acquired adaptation! This would need to be re-upped every month or so. Good for travel and brief encounters. Not an actual immunization. Not too mention boosting cell growth factors can have unintended…

I would also mention, just general auto-immune diseases. I would be very worried this could trigger those in people who wouldn't have gotten one otherwise.

What's interesting to me is that one of the biggest booms in pharma over the last ~10 years has been biologics / monoclonal antibodies that treat auto-immune diseases by SUPRESSING cytokines. Examples include TNF inhibitors like Remicade/Humira/Enbrel; or specific IL-XX inhibitors like Dupixent/Cosentyx/Skyrizi/Tremfya/etc; or interferon therapies for MS. These are increasingly used for a broad (unlimited?) set of autoimmune or inflammatory diseases and work by blocking specific cytokines to reduce immune overactivity.

What this treatment does is the opposite side of that coin, it mimics cytokines in order to PROMOTE an immune response.

Immune regulation is an area that deserves a lot more research, and there is going to be learning (harm) along the way. An increasing body of science is pointing to autoimmune diseases being triggered by traditional vaccines, which are then treated by the biologics above that increase the likelihood of other disease due to immunosuppression, which can now be treated(?) by a new immunobooster AKA universal vaccine?

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#132

Post by cush »

cameldrv wrote: post #72

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…

> you'd think evolution would have done it already, but it didn't, which makes me think there's probably a downside

Couldn’t you apply this logic to any medicine?

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#133

Post by jmye »

butILoveLife wrote: post #120
jmye wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cant we say this applies to the flu vaccine? This almost validates why I skip it every year. These two things have literally nothing to do with each other. > I get sick after getting the flu vaccine and feel pretty bad for 1-3 days I thought you skipped it every year? So did this happen like, once, and you don't actually have any real basis for comparison or understanding, here? Come on.

Did it for a few years in my 20s. Then did it for a few years from family peer pressure. Then did the covid thing. Probably n=5 or 6 out of 18.

And you distinctly remember every single one of those 5-6 years getting sick immediately after, and getting the flu the same year? Again, come on now. This isn't even anecdata, it's just invented memories to push a conclusion you arrived at in your 20s with no actual understanding or basis of knowledge. I assume you think there are no benefits to having gotten the flu vaccine, if you do happen to get the flu after, either, for reasons that are surely backed by strong evidence and subject matter expertise, and not like, Facebook posts.

I don't know why people feel so compelled to invent stories about vaccines they hate but don't even vaguely understand, especially when the creative writing is so poor. It's such a weirdly pervasive thing in healthcare, that people think basic existence is the same as expertise.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#134

Post by gwerbin »

GorbachevyChase wrote: post #128
chewbacha wrote: post #114

This is cool but I’m sorry, that’s not a vaccine - it’s a prophylactic. A vaccine or inoculation is named because it creates a sustained adaptation to a targeted antigen. Something that boosts immune response is not an acquired adaptation! This would need to be re-upped every month or so. Good for travel and brief encounters. Not an actual immunization. Not too mention boosting cell growth factors can have unintended…

[flagged]

> This particular treatment seems like it would stimulate immune response all the time which doesn’t strike me as a good thing. I may stick to a multivitamin for now.

They're going to say it's "safe", and only the crackpot wingnuts who believe in ancient aliens will complain, and then in 30 years when we realize it actually wasn't as safe as claimed, the next generation of The Powers that Be will make a big show of banning them and tout it as a big win for public health.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#135

Post by jmye »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #126
jmye wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I don't think you understand evolution. Neither needs to be "better" for anything other than survival to reproduction. Evolution isn't min-maxing in a video game.

I don’t think you understand it, if you cannot connect the dots. And of course “survival for reproduction” is oversimplification of what’s actually happening. Chances for survival to reproduce of some individuals are greatly influenced by survival of their relatives in the same group. The traits that help whole group to survive will win in natural selection, including those that extend survival beyond what’s necessar…

> I don’t think you understand it, if you cannot connect the dots.

This doesn't mean anything.

> Chances for survival to reproduce of some individuals are greatly influenced by survival of their relatives in the same group. The traits that help whole group to survive will win in natural selection, including those that extend survival beyond what’s necessary to reproduce to what’s beneficial for the group.

Which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with whether current traits are optimized for perfection, or simply sufficient for continued reproduction. Again, evolution isn't min-maxing your video game character. I'm not clear why you have such strident opinions on something you don't understand very well.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#136

Post by cameldrv »

suddenlybananas wrote: post #86
cameldrv wrote: post #72

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…

Evolution is not a perfect optimizer.

No but it’s very good. Just upregulating an already existing system is the sort of thing that can evolve very quickly if there’s a big benefit to survival.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#137

Post by brewcejener »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #131
jml78 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would also mention, just general auto-immune diseases. I would be very worried this could trigger those in people who wouldn't have gotten one otherwise.

What's interesting to me is that one of the biggest booms in pharma over the last ~10 years has been biologics / monoclonal antibodies that treat auto-immune diseases by SUPRESSING cytokines. Examples include TNF inhibitors like Remicade/Humira/Enbrel; or specific IL-XX inhibitors like Dupixent/Cosentyx/Skyrizi/Tremfya/etc; or interferon therapies for MS. These are increasingly used for a broad (unlimited?) set of au…

[dead]

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#138

Post by brewcejener »

slibhb wrote: post #124
cameldrv wrote: post #72

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…

You wouldn't have to do it all the time. Modern humans are much more likely to get a respiratory infection in the winter (I get sick once a year like clockwork). It could be worth stimulating your innate immune system for a few months every year during flu season. Or before traveling.

[dead]

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#139

Post by tshaddox »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #61
tshaddox wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There doesn’t need to be an evolutionary reason why we don’t have something. That’s the default!

If something clearly helps survival and not an improbable thing to develop, the chances are high we would already have it. But we don’t and most species don’t. It is not the default, there likely exists a reason why.

> If something clearly helps survival and not an improbable thing to develop, the chances are high we would already have it.

Well sure, but "not an improbable thing to develop" is doing a lot of work there. Again, everything complex is "improbable to develop," in the sense that evolution takes a lot of time and is very path dependent.

Re: Universal vaccine against respiratory infections and allergens

#140

Post by throwatdem12311 »

cameldrv wrote: post #72

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…

That’s not how evolution works.
Post reply on HN