OT: sick

It is free in BC in many circumstances:

formatting link

Other Canadian provinces have different requirements, but if you are over 65 or work in health care or with children it is generally free.

John

Reply to
John Robertson
Loading thread data ...

e:

.

Well you're obviously not representative of anything because if everybody p aid no income tax, your government would be broke and couldn't afford to ha nd out bandaids. Almost every country with universal healthcare has taxes w ay in excess of the U.S. so you don't have any bragging rights there.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

Bursts??? LOL- good one. Just goes to show how screwy the ideas people get when they read the popular science literature written be equally clueless types.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

No :) But advertisers are most familiar with it

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

There are two things over here that are an approximation to a national religion in peoples' hearts: the BBC (especially Radio 4) and the NHS.

Here we regard countries without universal healthcare as being somewhat uncivilised. Some, like Afghanistan and the Congo(s) are to be avoided.

In the context of disease prevention and containment, universal healthcare is extremely valuable, as it significantly reduces the reservoirs of infection.

Reply to
Tom Gardner

formatting link

process that kills the cell by bursting its membrane and cell wall if present: This is a feature of many bacterial and some animal viruses.

Fred, why are you such a total jerk?

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

:

y two

ttle,

ep it

ry, or

r

et when they read the popular science literature written be equally clueles s types.

Maybe he didn't like burst? is unzipping better? GH

Reply to
George Herold

:

y two

ttle,

ep it

ry, or

r

et when they read the popular science literature written be equally clueles s types.

Looks like the cell leaks replicated virus through its membrane. The replic ation process continues until the cell runs out of energy. I don't see anyt hing about the cell going off like a firecracker.

formatting link

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

This is an area of research where new things are being discovered, and where it is very difficult to do controlled studies in the real world. So I am wary of being /too/ categorical - the known science changes as we learn more, and "current scientific knowledge" might turn out to be inaccurate.

With that proviso, current scientific knowledge is that the basic mechanism for "natural immunity" is no better than vaccine-provided immunity for the same pathogen, because they work in exactly the same way. There is one thing that can make a bigger difference for some types of vaccine. Vaccines are often formed from related, damaged, or partial pathogens rather than the full dangerous one (a fine example being cow pox being used to vaccinate against small pox). For most vaccines, all the critical parts are in place so immunity is the same as for immunity gained from exposure to the real pathogen. But for some, the immunity will be a little less accurate.

There are other factors to consider in this. When you are already ill, your immune system may "learn" faster and more accurately because your immune system is already in high gear. But it might also be worse at learning, because it is weakened by the illness or because the focus is on fighting the disease in other ways. This will depend on the pathogen, the details of the vaccine, and to some extend on the person in question.

A common fallacy that makes the myth of "natural immunity is best" sound likely is the idea that "natural" immunity is 100% - it is not. Even for pathogens that do not mutate, and that do not directly interfere with the immune system or hide in clever ways (like herpes viruses hiding in nerve cells), it is not 100%. And it decays with time. This is /exactly/ the same of "natural" immunity and vaccine-induced immunity.

And in trying to decide what is "best", the differences in effectiveness must be balanced against the ill-effects of the disease. For dangerous diseases like measles, the after-effects can be very bad. Even for something like the flu in a healthy person, there is the possibility of "post viral syndrome".

Rubbish. There is nothing special about being "man made".

/All/ flus need new immunity every season, because (in general) it is a different flu virus each season. It does not matter if you get that immunity from having the flu, or from the vaccine. People (without the vaccine) get the flu again and again - perhaps not every year, but many times in their lifetimes.

Yes, there has been some solid progress recently towards lifetime vaccines or successful treatments of a range of flu and cold viruses.

No, that is not "obvious" in any way. There are many reasons why Jim might not get the flu, including:

  1. He could be wrong. Lots of people say they never get the flu, or haven't had it for years, when that simply is not true. They may have only been lightly affected (more like a cold, or a couple of days feeling poorly). An old guy I knew got the cold every couple of years - and each time, he would claim it was the first time since his childhood. I am not suggesting Jim is intentionally lying, but it is surprisingly easy to make such mistakes.
  2. He is presumably a healthy individual (as he is still with us). Keeping fit, eating well, and generally having a healthy lifestyle is an excellent protection against most diseases.
  3. He lives in a warm, dry climate - exactly the kind of place the flu virus does not thrive. It is not a densely populated place, and he is such a grumpy old git that he probably has relatively few interactions with people. There is simply not much opportunity for him to get in contact with people with the flu virus. As long as he is careful with snotty-nosed grandkids, his risks of contracting anything are small.
  4. Good hand hygiene is important - perhaps he has always been a factitious hand-washer. The flu spreads mainly by people coughing or sneezing on things, or getting the virus on their hands from their hankies, and touching things. When someone else touches the same doorknob or whatever, and then picks their nose, rubs their eyes, or eats their sandwiches, the virus enters the system.
  5. Maybe he has a natural genetic resistance to the flu. Some people do, for various diseases.
  6. Maybe - and I think this is by far the least likely - his immune system got lucky and made antibodies to a protein that is common in a range of flu viruses, rather than the proteins normally countered (which vary from flu to flu).

No, you are missing the point. The flu vaccine in the US and everywhere else is 90 to 95% effective. The problem is that it was made to combat the strain that was expected to be dominant this year - but by bad luck, a different strain has gained traction. Each strain of flu is different, and requires different immunities - there is only a small (but not zero) benefit across strains.

Reply to
David Brown

Really? And where exactly did you study immunology to acquire such a profou nd wisdom of the state of the science? Have you taken a single course in im munology? Don't bother answering, I know the answer. The antibody response, which is not the only immune response, is different for inactivated virus and live virus. In some vaccines the antigen is a simple surface protein pa rt of the virus and is enough to induce immunity. Then immunity doesn't mea n what you think it does. In the science immunity means a much faster respo nse, something like 100 hours, versus possibly weeks the non-immune system requires. And the antibodies don't fade, they die. Their formulation is ens conced in memory T-lymphocytes that greatly speed up the immune response to infection. The memory T-cells last forever. Natural immunity is very real albeit accidental so there is no guarantee a particular individual can acqu ire it.

Yes there is.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

Care to specify what it is? "Manmade vaccines" induce exactly the same anti bodies as natural infections - though the system isn't as vigorously challe nged in the process - and the immune response triggered when those antibodi es detect something is exactly the same as that triggered when any other an tibody detects something.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

s
t

tibodies as natural infections - though the system isn't as vigorously chal lenged in the process - and the immune response triggered when those antibo dies detect something is exactly the same as that triggered when any other antibody detects something.

Run a search on cytokines and chemokines and this quick summary: "An antibody response is the culmination of a series of interactions betwee n macrophages, T lymphocytes and B lymphocytes. Infectious agent antigens a re engulfed and partially degraded by antigen-presenting cells (APCs), such as macrophages, Langerhans cells, dendritic cells, lymph nodes and monocyt es.

Fragments of the antigen will appear on the surface of the APC attached to a cell surface glycoprotein known as MHC II (major histocompatibility comp lex). There are two types of MHC molecules: MHC class I are expressed on th e surfaces of most cells, and class II, which are expressed exclusively on the surfaces of APCs. The antigen-MHC II complex allows Th cells to bind to the APC which leads to a proliferation of Th cells and release of cytokine s. T cells then bind to the MHC complex on B cells leading to proliferation and differentiation of B cells. B cells change into plasma cells which sec rete large quantities of finely tuned antibodies specific to the foreign ag ent. Some B cells are changed into memory cells, which can generate a faste r antibody-mediated immune response upon future infection."

formatting link

Antibodies don't come out of thin air. They are the culmination of a multis tage process involving the white blood cells T-lymphocytes, which themselve s are involved in the final clearance of the pathogen.

Antibodies in and of themselves are not the total answer. Many infections a re detected by running an ELISA on the blood of the host to detect their pr esence. The host continues to be infected because the antibodies are ineffe ctive.

formatting link

Here's an example of a deadly virus detectable through antibody testing for which there is no vaccine.

formatting link

107/

Many vaccine developments end up as total failures because the particular a ntibodies they induce are ineffective even though they attack the pathogen, they do so weakly or are ineffective for some other reason.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

:
y

t's

hat

is

antibodies as natural infections - though the system isn't as vigorously ch allenged in the process - and the immune response triggered when those anti bodies detect something is exactly the same as that triggered when any othe r antibody detects something.

een macrophages, T lymphocytes and B lymphocytes. Infectious agent antigens are engulfed and partially degraded by antigen-presenting cells (APCs), su ch as macrophages, Langerhans cells, dendritic cells, lymph nodes and monoc ytes.

o a cell surface glycoprotein known as MHC II (major histocompatibility co mplex). There are two types of MHC molecules: MHC class I are expressed on the surfaces of most cells, and class II, which are expressed exclusively o n the surfaces of APCs. The antigen-MHC II complex allows Th cells to bind to the APC which leads to a proliferation of Th cells and release of cytoki nes. T cells then bind to the MHC complex on B cells leading to proliferati on and differentiation of B cells. B cells change into plasma cells which s ecrete large quantities of finely tuned antibodies specific to the foreign agent. Some B cells are changed into memory cells, which can generate a fas ter antibody-mediated immune response upon future infection."

e

istage process involving the white blood cells T-lymphocytes, which themsel ves are involved in the final clearance of the pathogen.

are detected by running an ELISA on the blood of the host to detect their presence. The host continues to be infected because the antibodies are inef fective.

formatting link

None of this suggests that an antibody produced by reaction to a vaccine is in any way different from an antibody produced by the reaction to an infec tion.

or which there is no vaccine.

formatting link

49107/

And how is that relevant to the question of whether an antibody produced in reaction to man-made vaccine is in any way different from one produce in r eaction to an infection?

antibodies they induce are ineffective even though they attack the pathoge n, they do so weakly or are ineffective for some other reason.

So what? If we ever produce a vaccine that induces the production of an ant ibody to the unchanging part of influenza virus surface, we'll have done better than nature ...

Nature buries it's mistakes. If a species can't produce an effective antibo dy reaction to a particular infection, it can go extinct - killing off the infective agent in the process, if it was a species-specific agent.

formatting link

Tuberculosis isn't all that species specific, and it is good at hiding itse lf from the immune response. The man-made vaccine isn't wonderful (yet) but it is better than nothing.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

te:

e:

e:

ily

of

hat's

that

ow

t is

e antibodies as natural infections - though the system isn't as vigorously challenged in the process - and the immune response triggered when those an tibodies detect something is exactly the same as that triggered when any ot her antibody detects something.

tween macrophages, T lymphocytes and B lymphocytes. Infectious agent antige ns are engulfed and partially degraded by antigen-presenting cells (APCs), such as macrophages, Langerhans cells, dendritic cells, lymph nodes and mon ocytes.

to a cell surface glycoprotein known as MHC II (major histocompatibility complex). There are two types of MHC molecules: MHC class I are expressed o n the surfaces of most cells, and class II, which are expressed exclusively on the surfaces of APCs. The antigen-MHC II complex allows Th cells to bin d to the APC which leads to a proliferation of Th cells and release of cyto kines. T cells then bind to the MHC complex on B cells leading to prolifera tion and differentiation of B cells. B cells change into plasma cells which secrete large quantities of finely tuned antibodies specific to the foreig n agent. Some B cells are changed into memory cells, which can generate a f aster antibody-mediated immune response upon future infection."

nse

ltistage process involving the white blood cells T-lymphocytes, which thems elves are involved in the final clearance of the pathogen.

ns are detected by running an ELISA on the blood of the host to detect thei r presence. The host continues to be infected because the antibodies are in effective.

formatting link

is in any way different from an antibody produced by the reaction to an inf ection.

for which there is no vaccine.

formatting link
MC49107/

in reaction to man-made vaccine is in any way different from one produce in reaction to an infection?

Seriously. Hepatitis B is a good example of a vaccine development that prod uces a *better* antibody than the infection. The vaccine confers immunity, the natural infection alone confers death ultimately. This goes the other w ay most notably with the hemorrhagic viruses such as Ebola. All you need to know is the response is different and it can be used to our advantage.

ar antibodies they induce are ineffective even though they attack the patho gen, they do so weakly or are ineffective for some other reason.

ntibody to the unchanging part of influenza virus surface, we'll have don e better than nature ...

Many times that kind of particular antibody is discovered by conducting blo od essays on people who exhibit the immunity, it is not a straightforward p rocess, especially in the case of a highly mutable virus.

body reaction to a particular infection, it can go extinct - killing off th e infective agent in the process, if it was a species-specific agent.

self from the immune response. The man-made vaccine isn't wonderful (yet) b ut it is better than nothing.

Are TB vaccines administered routinely? I don't think so, maybe in Russian prisons. The best treatment is powerful antibiotic to knock down the infect ing population to the point your natural immunity can keep it under control .

TB is a bacteria and the vaccines to treat bacteria infection get really we ird. Lyme's disease is another with a vaccine that takes a really weird app roach, makes one wonder how it ever works.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

e:

rote:

ote:

wn

ote:

amily

r of

what's

it that

how

hat is

ame antibodies as natural infections - though the system isn't as vigorousl y challenged in the process - and the immune response triggered when those antibodies detect something is exactly the same as that triggered when any other antibody detects something.

between macrophages, T lymphocytes and B lymphocytes. Infectious agent anti gens are engulfed and partially degraded by antigen-presenting cells (APCs) , such as macrophages, Langerhans cells, dendritic cells, lymph nodes and m onocytes.

ed to a cell surface glycoprotein known as MHC II (major histocompatibilit y complex). There are two types of MHC molecules: MHC class I are expressed on the surfaces of most cells, and class II, which are expressed exclusive ly on the surfaces of APCs. The antigen-MHC II complex allows Th cells to b ind to the APC which leads to a proliferation of Th cells and release of cy tokines. T cells then bind to the MHC complex on B cells leading to prolife ration and differentiation of B cells. B cells change into plasma cells whi ch secrete large quantities of finely tuned antibodies specific to the fore ign agent. Some B cells are changed into memory cells, which can generate a faster antibody-mediated immune response upon future infection."

ponse

multistage process involving the white blood cells T-lymphocytes, which the mselves are involved in the final clearance of the pathogen.

ions are detected by running an ELISA on the blood of the host to detect th eir presence. The host continues to be infected because the antibodies are ineffective.

formatting link

e is in any way different from an antibody produced by the reaction to an i nfection.

ng for which there is no vaccine.

formatting link
/PMC49107/

d in reaction to man-made vaccine is in any way different from one produce in reaction to an infection?

oduces a *better* antibody than the infection. The vaccine confers immunity , the natural infection alone confers death ultimately. This goes the other way most notably with the hemorrhagic viruses such as Ebola. All you need to know is the response is different and it can be used to our advantage.

ular antibodies they induce are ineffective even though they attack the pat hogen, they do so weakly or are ineffective for some other reason.

antibody to the unchanging part of influenza virus surface, we'll have d one better than nature ...

lood essays on people who exhibit the immunity, it is not a straightforward process, especially in the case of a highly mutable virus.

tibody reaction to a particular infection, it can go extinct - killing off the infective agent in the process, if it was a species-specific agent.

itself from the immune response. The man-made vaccine isn't wonderful (yet) but it is better than nothing.

You don't give BGC to anybody who already has TB, so you have to test for e vidence - antibody response to TB antigens - first, so it's not routine.

I got it when I first went to university, when there was more TB around, as part of the incoming student health routine, so back then it was sort of r outine.

formatting link

Immigrant holding camps would be a more likely example.

ulation to the point your natural immunity can keep it under control.

It's a good idea to keep on giving the antibiotic until infection has been demonstrably controlled. The US health went through a period where it wasn' t very good at that.

weird. Lyme's disease is another with a vaccine that takes a really weird a pproach, makes one wonder how it ever works.

I've got antibodies to borrelia (which is what Europeans call Lyme disease) . My wife was less lucky and get secondary borrelia, which had to be cleane d out with massive doses of intravenous antibiotic for a month. No fun.

formatting link

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.