#Immunity and vaccinations

[pangur-and-grim]

I feel like if you’re bed rotting from an autoimmune disease you should get to stop paying bills. just for a little bit. just as a treat.

[aashiqeddiediaz]

you know what boils my blood.

over the last 2 weeks, i've seen countless patients walk into my urgent care center, symptomatic for so many things, refusing to get tested for covid and flu, citing that they don't want to knowingly bring it to their holiday tables. i had a patient tell me, verbatim, "i don't want to test for covid, because i don't want to be the asshole who brings it on a plane."

i understand that - i understand that holidays are times where people look forward to meeting loved ones that they might only see once a year, or where they get a break from the hectic back and forth of their lives.

but here's the thing - whether they get tested or not, they will bring whatever they have to their holiday tables. it's pure recklessness to know that you're sick, and walk into someone else's house spreading the disease.

today, january 2, i saw 91 patients, many of them who have tested positive for covid and flu. many of these patients are the same ones who didn't want testing 3 days ago, until their events were over, and now, they will have to reach out to everyone they know to let them know that they were positive because they were showing symptoms well before their event.

the next week or two? we're going to see many, many more, all people with symptoms that started around christmas. these are the only two viruses we test for rapidly in our office, but they are potent and can be fatal in many people.

so here's why i wrote this post, and maybe it's a little late, but - if you care about your loved ones, please get tested if you know you're sick. it doesn't have to be at a clinic if you don't want it to, because the over-the-counter tests work just fine too (if you test within 5-7 days of symptom onset). just...please don't try to run from the knowledge that you might have covid, because immunocompromised people, elderly people, people with co-morbidities like asthma, pregnancy, diabetes, etc...many of them may not recover. and they may not be sitting at your holiday table in the future because of it.

[nando161mando]

'Like many debunked ideas, hygiene theory and the myth of the bored immune system have become entrenched. A couple of years ago, hygiene theory got repackaged as "immunity debt." Now Americans, Canadians, and many Europeans think they need to get sick to stay healthy. The elites have absolutely no problem with that. It saves them countless billions to let everyone continue thinking they're better off letting diseases run around in their cells.

So:

Your immune system doesn't work like a muscle. It doesn't get stronger the more it's exposed to different harmful germs.

It doesn't need practice.

...

Think of it like this:

Your body already knows how to heal its skin and bones. You don't have to teach it how to do that by cutting yourself or breaking your arm.

As it happens, many westerners also think bones grow back stronger after they're broken and scar tissue is tougher than normal skin.

That's also false.

Scar tissue remains functionally deficient in many ways compared to uninjured skin. Broken bones form a temporary calcium callus that's stronger than ordinary bone, but it's eventually replaced.

These misguided ideas fit in a culture obsessed with tough love, the idea that abusing someone somehow builds their character. And while it might make you interesting, it's certainly not "good" for you.'

— Jessica Wildfire

[cognitiveinequality]

uh oh.

[dailiadelc]

[giorgio52fan]

Uncertain Horizon: Will the COVID School Years Return Amid New Variants?

The relentless specter of COVID-19 continues to cast a shadow over the education landscape. As the world grapples with the ever-evolving variants of the virus, the question on everyone’s mind is whether the COVID school years will return. Despite the optimism of public health officials and the reassurances regarding the efficacy of tests and vaccines against new variants, a critical examination…

[reasonsforhope]

"Since it was first identified in 1983, HIV has infected more than 85 million people and caused some 40 million deaths worldwide.

While medication known as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, can significantly reduce the risk of getting HIV, it has to be taken every day to be effective. A vaccine to provide lasting protection has eluded researchers for decades. Now, there may finally be a viable strategy for making one.

An experimental vaccine developed at Duke University triggered an elusive type of broadly neutralizing antibody in a small group of people enrolled in a 2019 clinical trial. The findings were published today [May 17, 2024] in the scientific journal Cell.

“This is one of the most pivotal studies in the HIV vaccine field to date,” says Glenda Gray, an HIV expert and the president and CEO of the South African Medical Research Council, who was not involved in the study.

A few years ago, a team from Scripps Research and the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) showed that it was possible to stimulate the precursor cells needed to make these rare antibodies in people. The Duke study goes a step further to generate these antibodies, albeit at low levels.

“This is a scientific feat and gives the field great hope that one can construct an HIV vaccine regimen that directs the immune response along a path that is required for protection,” Gray says.

-via WIRED, May 17, 2024. Article continues below.

Vaccines work by training the immune system to recognize a virus or other pathogen. They introduce something that looks like the virus—a piece of it, for example, or a weakened version of it—and by doing so, spur the body’s B cells into producing protective antibodies against it. Those antibodies stick around so that when a person later encounters the real virus, the immune system remembers and is poised to attack.

While researchers were able to produce Covid-19 vaccines in a matter of months, creating a vaccine against HIV has proven much more challenging. The problem is the unique nature of the virus. HIV mutates rapidly, meaning it can quickly outmaneuver immune defenses. It also integrates into the human genome within a few days of exposure, hiding out from the immune system.

“Parts of the virus look like our own cells, and we don’t like to make antibodies against our own selves,” says Barton Haynes, director of the Duke Human Vaccine Institute and one of the authors on the paper.

The particular antibodies that researchers are interested in are known as broadly neutralizing antibodies, which can recognize and block different versions of the virus. Because of HIV’s shape-shifting nature, there are two main types of HIV and each has several strains. An effective vaccine will need to target many of them.

Some HIV-infected individuals generate broadly neutralizing antibodies, although it often takes years of living with HIV to do so, Haynes says. Even then, people don’t make enough of them to fight off the virus. These special antibodies are made by unusual B cells that are loaded with mutations they’ve acquired over time in reaction to the virus changing inside the body. “These are weird antibodies,” Haynes says. “The body doesn’t make them easily.”

Haynes and his colleagues aimed to speed up that process in healthy, HIV-negative people. Their vaccine uses synthetic molecules that mimic a part of HIV’s outer coat, or envelope, called the membrane proximal external region. This area remains stable even as the virus mutates. Antibodies against this region can block many circulating strains of HIV.

The trial enrolled 20 healthy participants who were HIV-negative. Of those, 15 people received two of four planned doses of the investigational vaccine, and five received three doses. The trial was halted when one participant experienced an allergic reaction that was not life-threatening. The team found that the reaction was likely due to an additive in the vaccine, which they plan to remove in future testing.

Still, they found that two doses of the vaccine were enough to induce low levels of broadly neutralizing antibodies within a few weeks. Notably, B cells seemed to remain in a state of development to allow them to continue acquiring mutations, so they could evolve along with the virus. Researchers tested the antibodies on HIV samples in the lab and found that they were able to neutralize between 15 and 35 percent of them.

Jeffrey Laurence, a scientific consultant at the Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR) and a professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College, says the findings represent a step forward, but that challenges remain. “It outlines a path for vaccine development, but there’s a lot of work that needs to be done,” he says.

For one, he says, a vaccine would need to generate antibody levels that are significantly higher and able to neutralize with greater efficacy. He also says a one-dose vaccine would be ideal. “If you’re ever going to have a vaccine that’s helpful to the world, you’re going to need one dose,” he says.

Targeting more regions of the virus envelope could produce a more robust response. Haynes says the next step is designing a vaccine with at least three components, all aimed at distinct regions of the virus. The goal is to guide the B cells to become much stronger neutralizers, Haynes says. “We’re going to move forward and build on what we have learned.”

-via WIRED, May 17, 2024

[kaiserouo]

civilian in the mall

[iamnmbr3]

vaccines are so cool. i love how it's like

Vaccine: hey see this guy?

Immune system: yeah?

Vaccine: this guy sucks. remember him. he wants to make you sick.

Immune system: he what?! If I ever see him again he's gonna catch these hands.

Vaccine: good!

*

Actual illness the vaccine was for: hey! 😈 

Immune system: OMG! ITS HIM! IT'S THE GUY! PREPARE TO GET WREKT MF!!!!!!!

[halorvic]

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Robert Tracinski for The UnPopulist:

The Covid-19 pandemic has produced a startling paradox. In response to the outbreak of a deadly disease, scientists developed an effective vaccine in record time. It is estimated to have saved three million lives in the U.S.—many more than the 1.2 million lives Covid claimed—and tens of millions of lives globally. Yet the immediate result is that resistance to vaccines increased. Those who oppose vaccines progressed rapidly from the fringe to the mainstream, and now, President Trump has appointed prominent vaccine skeptics to run the nation’s top health agencies: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at Health and Human Services and Dave Weldon at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. How did we arrive at such a perverse result? Why are people turning against a lifesaving technology precisely at the moment when it has demonstrated its value?

A Pandemic Interrupted

The effectiveness of the vaccine is well supported by facts and evidence. For instance, a 2022 study in the New England Journal of Medicine (see a summary here) found that Covid vaccines were “52.2% effective at preventing infection and 66.8% effective at preventing hospitalization.” In other words, if you were vaccinated, you were half as likely to get the disease, and if you did get it, you were a third as likely to suffer a serious case. The effectiveness of the vaccine fades over time—but then again, so does the natural immunity conferred by getting full-blown Covid.

You can see the result in this chart of Covid death rates for the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated. The differential has narrowed in recent years as the pandemic recedes and far fewer people are getting Covid in the first place. But notice the giant spike in January of 2022, when the unvaccinated were dying at a rate 10 times as high as the vaccinated. That is how we know this was a successful vaccine, and that’s when a lot of lives were saved. A flurry of bad arguments has attempted to bury these facts in the public mind. Consider the complaint that the Covid vaccines are not “real” vaccines because they don’t provide “sterilizing immunity”—that is, they don’t completely prevent transmission of the disease. But this is based on ignorance about how “real” vaccines work. For example, Jonas Salk’s famous polio vaccine didn’t provide sterilizing immunity, either. Yet it kept the polio virus from attacking the nervous system, preventing paralysis and death.

But this issue is a red herring, because other vaccines such as the HPV vaccine do provide sterilizing immunity—and more than that, a 2020 study showed that the HPV vaccine’s adoption resulted in a 90% decrease in cervical cancer. Yet this vaccine was also targeted by a misinformation campaign. It briefly became an issue in the 2012 Republican primaries, when anti-vaccine talking points were promoted by Sarah Palin and others in the populist faction of the party that has since become dominant. Other objections, such as complaints about inconsistent or inaccurate early CDC recommendations about, for example, masking, are also red herrings—because the people who tout these arguments then tend to credulously accept the assertions of vaccine skeptics who have been wrong far, far more often than the experts. The success of the Covid vaccine can be seen in the degree to which we no longer worry about the disease. That in itself is not too remarkable. All pandemics eventually fade. What was really different this time is that the Covid vaccine cut the progress of the disease short. Before Covid, the fastest time for developing and deploying a vaccine was four years. At that pace, we would just have gotten our first Covid shots in 2024. But the new vaccines were deployed in less than a year, before the end of 2020.

[...]

Industrial Amnesia

This forgotten history suggests one of the main drivers of the current vaccine paradox. People turned against vaccines after Covid simply because the pandemic required them to think about vaccines, which they haven’t done for a long time. And because they haven’t done it for such a long time, they have forgotten—or never learned in the first place—why vaccines existed, what problem they solved. You may have heard the famous story about church bells ringing in 1953 when the successful test of the polio vaccine was announced. This is because most people had actually witnessed the horrible effects of the disease—it peaked in the U.S. in 1952—and many still remembered an era when children routinely died from infectious diseases.

This UnPopulist column nails it on why the rise of anti-vaxxer extremism has spread.

[so-true-overdue]

The Grand Illusion of Effective Altruism

In the grand theater of moral philosophy, where the spotlight often shines on the most ostentatious of ethical posturing, effective altruism stands as a paragon of misguided benevolence. Cloaked in the guise of utilitarian virtue, it is a doctrine that purports to save the world with the precision of a mathematical equation, yet often stumbles over its own self-serving, authoritarian, and overly simplistic ideals.

The Self-Serving Savior Complex

At its core, effective altruism is a movement that claims to maximize the good one can do with their resources. However, beneath this veneer of altruistic ambition lies a self-serving savior complex. Proponents often indulge in a form of moral grandstanding, where the act of giving is less about the recipient and more about the giver’s self-image. The movement’s adherents are frequently found basking in the glow of their own perceived magnanimity, as if their philanthropic endeavors were a ticket to moral superiority.

Authoritarian Overtones

Effective altruism, with its rigid adherence to utilitarian calculus, often veers into authoritarian territory. It prescribes a one-size-fits-all approach to philanthropy, dictating which causes are worthy of attention based on a narrow set of criteria. This dogmatic rigidity stifles the diversity of thought and action that is essential for addressing the multifaceted challenges of our world. By elevating certain causes above others, it inadvertently marginalizes those who do not fit neatly into its algorithmic framework.

The Perils of Oversimplification

The movement’s penchant for oversimplification is perhaps its most glaring flaw. In its quest to quantify the impact of charitable actions, effective altruism reduces complex social issues to mere numbers on a spreadsheet. This reductionist approach fails to account for the nuanced realities of human suffering and the intricate web of factors that contribute to it. By focusing solely on measurable outcomes, it overlooks the intangible, yet equally vital, aspects of human well-being.

A Call for Holistic Altruism

In contrast to the narrow confines of effective altruism, a more holistic approach to philanthropy recognizes the importance of empathy, cultural sensitivity, and local knowledge. It values the voices of those it seeks to help and prioritizes their agency in the decision-making process. This alternative model of altruism embraces the complexity of human experience and acknowledges that true change often requires more than just financial investment.

Conclusion: Beyond the Illusion

In conclusion, while effective altruism may present itself as the panacea for global suffering, it is, in reality, a mirage of moral rectitude. Its self-serving nature, authoritarian tendencies, and simplistic worldview render it ill-equipped to address the intricate challenges of our time. Instead, we must strive for a more inclusive and empathetic form of altruism—one that transcends the limitations of mere effectiveness and embraces the full spectrum of human dignity.

[letranger-soleil]

TV taught me how to feel

And now real life has no appeal

[softartemisart]

when i was in school we learned about the development of vaccines and we were shown satirical illustrations of people getting vaxxed and turning into cows as a result (because they used cowpox to immunise people to smallpox) and while i can appreciate the the significance of that historically in terms of attitudes to medicine and scientific advancement or whatever, i do also wish it were real and i could get hucow side effects by being immunised to deadly diseases.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jessica Glenza at The Guardian:

Robert F Kennedy Jr, the US health secretary, named eight new vaccine advisers this week to a critical Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) panel after firing all 17 experts who had held the roles. New members of the panel include experts who complained about being sidelined, a high-profile figure who has spread misinformation and medical professionals who appear to have little vaccine expertise. Kennedy made the announcement on social media.

“All of these individuals are committed to evidence-based medicine, gold-standard science, and common sense,” Kennedy said in his announcement. “They have each committed to demanding definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations.” Formally called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the panel advises the CDC on how vaccines should be distributed. Those recommendations in effect determine the vaccines Americans can access. This week, Kennedy also removed the career officials typically tasked with vetting ACIP members and overseeing the advisory group, according to CBS News.

HHS head Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made 8 appointments to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), and almost all of them have had anti-vaxxer and/or COVID mitigations-skeptical views, especially Retsef Levi, “Dr.” Robert Malone, and Martin Kulldorff.

See Also:

Health Policy Watch: COVID Critics Dominate New US Vaccine Advisory Committee

[so-true-overdue]

Vaccines: The Unsung Heroes of Modern Medicine

Imagine a world where smallpox still reigned supreme, where polio paralyzed thousands annually, and where measles was a rite of passage, sometimes fatal. Yet, here we are, in a world where vaccines have valiantly vanquished these threats.

The paramountcy of vaccines in the annals of medical triumphs cannot be overstated. They are the quintessence of human ingenuity, a testament to our ability to combat nature's most insidious adversaries. Through the meticulous administration of vaccines, we have consigned diseases like smallpox to the historical archives and reduced the scourge of polio to a mere whisper in the annals of modern afflictions.

Statistically, the efficacy of vaccines is irrefutable. The World Health Organization estimates that vaccines prevent 2-3 million deaths annually. Consider the measles vaccine: a marvel of medical science that has reduced global measles deaths by 73% between 2000 and 2018. Similarly, the introduction of the polio vaccine has brought the incidence of polio down by 99%, from 350,000 cases in 1988 to just 33 reported cases in 2018.

Yet, amidst this triumph, there exists a cacophony of dissent. The sanctimonious detractors, draped in the garb of skepticism, pontificate about the perils of vaccination. They brandish anecdotes of adverse reactions as if they were incontrovertible evidence, ignoring the overwhelming preponderance of scientific data. Yes, vaccines, like all medical interventions, are not devoid of risks. However, the incidence of serious adverse reactions is exceedingly rare. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes that severe allergic reactions occur in about 1 in a million doses of vaccines. To put this in perspective, the likelihood of being struck by lightning in any given year is approximately 1 in 500,000—twice as likely as experiencing a severe vaccine reaction.

The irony is palpable. The very individuals who eschew vaccines on the grounds of potential harm are often the beneficiaries of the herd immunity afforded by the vaccinated majority. Their sanctimony is not only misplaced but perilously undermines public health efforts. The resurgence of measles in recent years, driven by declining vaccination rates, is a stark reminder of the consequences of such misguided dogma.

In conclusion, vaccines are the silent sentinels, safeguarding humanity against the ravages of infectious diseases. Their unparalleled efficacy, coupled with an exceptionally low incidence of adverse reactions, renders the anti-vaccine rhetoric not only scientifically unfounded but also morally untenable. The sanctimonious naysayers, in their misguided zeal, imperil the very fabric of our collective health. Let us, therefore, celebrate vaccines for what they truly are: the unsung heroes of modern medicine.