I doubt it to be possible, but it certainly wouldn’t hurt to try. Even if you miss the moon, you learn from the process.
The point is that it is not really a vaccine. A vaccine is against a specific threat, like this or that virus, and if it is good, against this or that virus class.
This stuff works by keeping your immune system on a hightened alert status, so it can react faster to any incoming, known threat. The known part is important here.
And if this “keeping the immune system on a permanent alert status” was any good on the long run, nature would long have normalized this, so there must be a severe drawback to it.
I read somewhere that when default body temperature was defined (100+ years ago), it was half a degree higher than nowadays, with all the hand washing, vaccines, etc. So maybe high alert used to be the norm.
Yes, an people died quite a lot of years earlier.
And then some MAGA will claim that it causes athelete’s foot, with no evidence at all, and it will be banned.
I am going to laugh when your comment gets cited as the source evidence for why this causes acute athletes foot.
“I read it on the Internet, so that’s a better source than YOU.”
I wouldn’t mind seeing a cute athlete’s foot.
deleted by creator
To be fair, some guy on the internet making promises does not constitute good evidence either.
Valid. We laugh at the snake oil salesmen of 150 years ago, but they are still among us, and they haven’t changed, like, at all.
This would wreck the dow oh no
So the researchers are planning trials where one person is vaccinated and then deliberately infected to see how their body copes.
Umm… What? Excuse me, but when has this been legal?
Umm… What? Excuse me, but when has this been legal?
Well at this point in a vaccine development it’s already passed preclinical (animal testing toxicity) phase 0 and phase I trials (which determines their safety and dosing).
They appear to be already at phase IIIb trial which is to test effectiveness with a group of people who are already at risk of exposure to the virus. Without a global pandemic this is axtually one the hardest and most expensive part of vaccine testing.
One of the core reasons why the covid vaccines were so quick to be released was because there was a massive pool of people who were exposed to the virus (and who were willing to put there hand up to try it).
We knew already that RNA vaccines were safe and weren’t deadly (as preclinical, phase 0 and phase 1 trials had already been done)
Take the Ebola vaccines. These have taken decades to develop because outside of the outbreak we had 12 years ago very few people are exposed to Ebola. It was really hard to find at risk individuals.
Also early Ebola vaccines used a live attenuated vaccine which had a one in a million chance that you get Ebola from the vaccine itself. So simply testing the vaccine could risk starting a epidemic
That said the latest, FDA approved vaccine is a replication-competent recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) vaccine (basically using another virus to deliver targeting data to your immune system.
They’ve been doing that stuff to animals for decades. Time we all started sharing the load
I dunno, if the vaccine was “safe,” and it really comes down to will this stop me getting a cold, I’d take one for the team. Maybe not the flu or COVID, although COVID never affected me so maybe I wouldn’t be a good candidate.
We just need an island of clones that we can test on, because clones aren’t real!
Something something Umbrella corp
The approach described in the journal Science does not train the immune system. Instead it mimics the way immune cells communicate with each other.
It is given as a nasal spray and leaves white blood cells in our lungs – called macrophages – on “amber alert” and ready to jump into action no matter what infection tries to get in.
The effect lasted for around three months in animal experiments.
Ye$$$$, quarterly vaccination$$$
I’m no immunologist, but there has to be a reason why we evolved so our immune system doesn’t constantly stay on “amber alert”. There has got to be drawbacks.
So one of the reasons asbestos is so dangerous is that it gets in your lungs where macrophages detect it as being foreign and try to destroy it. The issue is that asbestos is way larger than these cells and it’s pretty resilient so they can’t break it apart and eat it. The cells "get frustrated " so they start releasing inflammatory substances trying to find a way to neutralize this foreign body. That prolonged inflammation is what eventually leads to mesothelioma and other cancers.
I’m not sure how they plan to avoid the inflammation caused by these cells being in constant fighting infection mode.
Hold up so I could have as much asbestos as I wanted if it weren’t for my stupid immune system?
deleted by creator
But the way evolution works is “whatever works that keeps the species alive”.
We haven’t evolved reading glasses, but they are helpful devices with very few downsides.
That said, there may well be unintended consequences and effects, sure.
I think of it this way. The immune system is like an army, ready to fight off foreign invaders. If you were a king, would you want a huge standing army at all times, or the ability to draft soldiers as needed? Having a huge standing army is not only a waste of resources if there isn’t anything to fight, but your soldiers might get bored and invent things to fight or just stir up trouble.
So my guess is you’d be prone to inflammation and develop food sensitivities, but it’s a total guess. If they were the case though, chronic inflammation is really bad long term.
Yes, I understand the theory. And it’s fine to discuss speculation, because that could turn out to be the case.
But I also brought up glasses because not everything the body has done to survive is something that can’t be changed.
We’ll have to see what happens when we turn up the immune system.
As a hopefuly kidney transplant candidate at some point… I’m very interested as I know after a transplant, I have to take things to suppress my immune system, so I particularly suspect for that reason I might not be able to benefit from this new thing… but I hope I’m wrong :)
Probably why there are auto-immune disorders, no? When the body randomly chooses to attack itself. Not a scientist so just speculating.
On one hand I can see the benefit of using such a booster right before flu season. On the other hand, yeah does it have a crash at the end? Does an overactive immune system damage healthy tissues? Does it create inflammation response that leads to depression, fatigue, other chronic issues? There is A LOT that can go wrong there.
Sure. You wouldn’t want it all the time. Aside from auto-immune issues even simple things like allergies might be worse
But if we think of it as a booster it could be useful. Someone in the household comes down with something, then everyone else does a quick squirt with the immu-alert nasal spray.
I’d be really worried about autoimmune reactions. I swear there’s been a few Trek episodes where some kind of universal vaccine has unintended consequences.
I’m not sure I’d put any truck into fictional sci-fi where everything needs a good story, so any positive needs a negative…
…but I get it. And yeah, it’s a worry.
Same. Every major corona infection I suffered has set off my immune system for months, leading to debilitating nerve and joint pain. Even some vaccinations trigger this, but with shorter and way less symptoms, modern vaccines are way better than what they prevent. So I have high hopes.
I get a light version of the flu for about a day after getting the flu vaccine despite everyone saying the vaccine doesn’t give me the flu. Low fever, achy joints, tiredness, sometimes even congestion.
Can you please CW this post, for people like RFK this could be really triggering of their emotions.
There are like a hundred or more causes of the common cold, some viruses and some bacteria. It doesn’t seem possible they would get all of them into one jab, let alone the flus and other coughs to boot. The flu is famously mutative too, it’s constantly evading immunity with new variations that make old jabs obsolete.
Read the article. It’s not a traditional vaccine as we know it, but it puts the immune system on a higher alert level in general, meaning it will have faster and stronger responses to any pathogens.
I personally expect that there will be downsides to that, which the researchers do acknowledge. But it’s interesting research nonetheless.
Sounds like a good way to trigger an autoimmune reaction.
That’s exactly my thought as well. We will likely be seeing an uptick in autoimmune diseases because of the hyperactive response for everything.
Interesting I will. Some vaccines already do that, the TB and Polio both boost Innate immunity, and produce lower death rates from all ailments, as confirmed by multiple independent studies, according to articles published in spring of 2020 in the NYTimes.
The TB is just given to kids I think, and lessens severity if not preventing infections completely, and I think had the more pronounced innate immunity.
My guy, if you’re going to criticize, at least skim the article. It’s not even an injection.
It’s not a critique, it’s a fact, that there are over a hundred causes of the common cold. If you don’t want to learn that fact go ahead and piss off.
The point is that nothing you said had anything to do with the article, so if you don’t want to fucking read the article before you spout off, it is YOU who should piss off.
That being said, once you do read the article, perhaps I would love to learn what relevant facts you have. But until then, you’re the asshole barging into the coffee shop MAKE ME A COFFEE NOW I DON’T CARE ABOUT ANYONE ELSE. Yeah, well, there’s a fuckin’ line here, man. Terrible analogy, but the point is that it is you who started off rude by commenting without bothering to read.
I notice that you were told you should read the article WELL before you replied to that person, so you already knew you should have read the article before being rude to them. Wow.
A vaccine against all the common colds alone would cover 200 separate viruses and bacteria. By definition, protecting against the common cold of 200 different pathogens is applicable to that fact.
You really think you have something here too, mentioning a fact that is applicable to the subject or no, if you don’t want to discuss that fact, then don’t remark on it. You are repeatedly remarking that facts about the common cold aren’t applicable to a discussion about the common cold, don’t remark on it then.
Well, kiddo, here’s the thing. I’m already firmly aware of how current vaccines work, and that they target specific viruses and bacteria. So your attempt to bring facts into the conversation was useless for me. I already know them.
And I already know something you don’t: That has nothing to do with what’s presented in this article.
So let me bring the salient part of the article to your attention:
Their approach marks a “radical departure” from the way vaccines have been designed for more than 200 years, they say.
Experts in the field said the study was “really exciting” despite being at an early stage and could be a “major step forward”.
Current vaccines train the body to fight one single infection. A measles vaccine protects against only measles and a chickenpox vaccine protects against only chickenpox.
This is how immunisation has worked since Edward Jenner pioneered vaccines in the late 18th Century.
The approach described in the journal Science does not train the immune system. Instead it mimics the way immune cells communicate with each other.
It is given as a nasal spray and leaves white blood cells in our lungs – called macrophages – on “amber alert” and ready to jump into action no matter what infection tries to get in.
The effect lasted for around three months in animal experiments.
So in other words, IF THIS WORKS, it does not work in the same way that you bring up, meaning your “fact” is USELESS and OFF-TOPIC, and had you spent two minutes of your time BOTHERING to read the article, you would have prevented yourself from looking like a stupid mothingfucking dumbass.
But no. Congrats, you stupid motherfucking dumbass, you not only look stupid, but you were stupidly rude about it on TOP of that.
Wow.
What a spectacular failure.
When you read the article, do let us know if you deign to grace us with more facts. We might honestly find them interesting. But until you do, know that you are WRONG and RUDE and please shut the hell up.
How does that invalidate someone contributing facts about the common cold? Like great, it’s a contribution explaining this from the article, but a vaccine against the common cold, does warrant sharing facts about the common cold, irrespective of the article.
Maybe you already know it’s 200 plus bacteria or viruses, many don’t. There’s no reason to take that confrontational attitude for sharing facts that are applicable to the subject at hand. Any reasonable person would think so too.
Jesus Christ you are a hardheaded idiot.
The only thing worse than ignorance is arrogance. Thanks for the reminder.
Also, read the article. It’s pretty interesting science with some valid limitations and concerns.
You think that sounds smart don’t you? Yes, facts about the common cold can’t be mentioned on a vaccine claiming to protect against them all, so arrogant!
You’re a very bitter, spiteful person. Why do you feel the need to act like that?
