OT: vaccine and natural immune response differences

Hi,

Here's an article on a paper that shows that natural immunity is superior to vaccine induced "immunity", since the natural immune response is proven to strengthen the innate immune system:

formatting link

"Scientists think of CD8 T cells as long-lived cells that become tuned to fight just one pathogen, but a new study finds that once CD8 T cells fight one pathogen, they also join the body's "innate" immune system, ready to answer the calls of the cytokine signals that are set off by a wide variety of infections."

"So it may be profitable in vaccine development to try to push CD8 T cells harder. When CD8 T cells are exposed to the specific virus they are tuned for, they multiply greatly, a process called expansion."

That last quote shows that vaccine immunity is deficient compared to natural immunity.

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M
Loading thread data ...

There are trade-offs, since there's always the danger of provoking an auto-immune response.

Present vaccines seems to do the job perfectly well, provided enough people use them. The main beneficiaries of stronger vaccines would be those who don't vaccinate and rely on herd immunity for protection, since stronger vaccines would produce a higher degree of herd immunity for the same proportion of the population who use them.

That is, free-loaders would benefit from the increased risk taken by the nonfree-loaders.

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

Hi,

The article is implying a fundamental deficit in vaccines, which is the evidence of the CD8 T cells innate immunity benefit from fighting off an infection. I doubt that vaccines will be able to successfully create this innate immunity boost any time soon. I am also pretty sure that the extra CD8 T cells are one of many beneficial things that are absent in people who are vaccinated.

An argument for vaccines used to be that fighting off an infection naturally doesn't make you stronger, but it is nice to see that is actually proven it does make you stronger to naturally fight off infections, and thus weaker the more vaccines you have.

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

I think you're misreading the article.

In any case, vaccines trigger an immune response, and the body fights off the infection. Just that in that particular case, it wouldn't have mattered if it had done nothing (except that no immunity would have been conferred).

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

Hi,

"So it may be profitable in vaccine development to try to push CD8 T cells harder."

That quote from the article is a diplomatic way of saying the vaccines are deficient and need further development.

When scientific evidence shows a problem with a mainstream supported technology like vaccines that's the type of wording researchers have to use, but in reality it should be saying vaccines aren't as good as the bodies own immune system which already carries out the function that they say would be "profitable" to develop in vaccines.

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

Hi,

The fact that there is a measurable difference in the immunity conferred from vaccines or acquired naturally (ie the CD8 T cells), could mean there are other differences as well on the molecular level.

For example the immune molecule "MHC class 1"

formatting link

This molecule is part of the immune system, and it may be expressed differently depending on if it was involved with a natural immune response or a vaccine induced immune response. This doesn't seem like a big deal, unless you see that this molecule is now also directly implicated in diseases such as Alzheimers, diabetes type2, and autism:

formatting link

from that page:

" MHCI proteins are known for their role in the immune system where they present protein fragments from pathogens and cancerous cells to T cells ... In the brain, however, the researchers found that MHCI immune molecules are one of the only known factors that limit the density of synapses, ensuring that synapses form in the appropriate numbers necessary to support healthy brain function. ... MHCI levels also are "dramatically altered" in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease, Boulanger said. ... Links between MHCI and autism also are emerging, Boulanger said. People with autism have more synapses than usual in specific brain regions. "

It is possible that a vaccine immune response will produce "altered" levels of the MHCI protein compared to a natural immune response.

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

fighting bears with you bare hands will make you stronger than just shooting them but is carries a substantial risk

-Lasse

Reply to
Lasse Langwadt Christensen

No it isn't. It's merely saying that it may be possible to make them even better.

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

Hi,

Highly vaccinated diseases like Chicken pox or mumps have very low mortality rates. Also if the focus was nutrition instead of vaccination the mortality rates would be even lower. It is possible that these types of non deadly viruses are in fact part of the environment beneficially for humans. An idea like that may seem strange, but saying "beneficial bacteria" also would seem strane not too long ago, however it has been shown that there is a symbiotic relationship with bacteria and also viruses within each person. Cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

I don't think that paper says that. What is says is that once you've got CD8 T cells by exposing them to 0one foreign protein they react to cytokine signals given off by cells exposed to other infections.

I don't see any suggestion in the article that vaccines are a better or worse way of getting CD8 T cells than exposure to "natural" infections. After all, how is the cellular machinery going to distinguish one from the other?

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

is says is that once you've got CD8 T cells by exposing them to 0one foreign protein they react to cytokine signals given off by cells exposed to other infections.

that vaccines are a better or worse way of getting CD8 T cells than exposure to "natural" infections. After all, how is the cellular machinery going to distinguish one from the other?

Hi,

"Subunit" vaccines an apparently common type:

formatting link
vaccines.aspx

seem to rely on the adaptive immune system's ability to detect the various antigens in the vaccine. The article talks about how mice genetically engineered to develop antigen based immunity (while lacking the STAT4 based innate immunity) didn't develop immunity to subsequent infections.

I did make the assumption that the vaccine will only give an antigen response, but I think this is true but it would be good to see a study showing whether a vaccine creates the same STAT4 proteins in the CD8 T cells:

" That protein is one of the reasons that natural killer (NK) cells, the acknowledged stalwarts of innate immunity, are sensitive to cytokines."

From statements in the article I think it is safe to assume vaccines don't provide STAT4 innate immunity benefit:

"So it may be profitable in vaccine development to try to push CD8 T cells harder."

Vaccines are an unhealthy choice for the majority of people, and the proper way to be healthy is a good diet and low stress.

Cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

That paper says no such thing. Clearly you know next to nothing about immun ology and you're just playing pretend.

Maybe in your hopelessly distorted world. The paper says no such thing. Wha t's going on here is that you're a vaccine parasite, you don't believe they work and/or they cause harm. So you dig up some literature you can't begin to comprehend and misinterpret it to support your idiocy.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

CD8 T cells by exposing them to 0one foreign protein they react to cytokine signals given off by cells exposed to other infections.

orse way of getting CD8 T cells than exposure to "natural" infections. Afte r all, how is the cellular machinery going to distinguish one from the othe r?

There are two components to the human immune system: innate immunity which mobilizes against non-self invaders of any kind, and acquired/specific immu nity which is mobilized against a specific pathogen. There are several vari eties of NK (natural killer) CD8 T-lymphocytes. There is a family of non-sp ecific NK CD8 part of the innate system, and there are specialized CD8 deve loped as part of of the adaptive immune system. The paper shows that under certain conditions the lines are blurred and the specialized CD8 are recrui ted into the defense in a way similar to the innate NK cells. The paper was about experiments attempting to prove that the protein STAT4 was responsib le or this effect. It says nothing about challenge by a different pathogen inducing proliferation of the specialized CD8 cells as they would when chal lenged by the original pathogen for which they specialzed. Generally they a re not effective unless produced in large numbers, the excess population su bsiding when the threat is gone. It's all about an observation and the role of STAT4.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

But that was because they'd been gene-engineered not to generate the STAT4 protein. Presumably, antigen-based immunity does lead to STAT4 generation, just like every other kind of challenge to the immune system.

Why do you think that? More CD8 T cells would probably be a good thing, but you could get them by throwing in extra antigens.

Sadly, natural infections can trump a good diet and low stress. They can be defeated by appropriate vaccination, and if a majority get vaccinated, you've got herd immunity, and the infections don't spread far enough to get to the unvaccinated.

There are low level risks from vaccination, but any real cost-benefit analysis show that plague-avoidance trumps individual anxieties.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

Hi,

The immunity that vaccines provide is inferior to the immunity provided by the bodies immune system successfully fighting off an infection, this is why some vaccines require periodic booster shots, and also have only a fixed amount of time that they will provide immunity. When you say "make them even better" you are implying they are already better than the bodies own immune system, but since they aren't therefore I think my interpretation is more accurate! :)

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

antigen-based immunity does lead to STAT4 generation, just like every other kind of challenge to

the immune system.

by throwing in extra antigens.

Hi,

You mentioned before about how could the cellular machinery distinguish between vaccines and a natural infection, implying that they have an equivalent response on the body. Rates of re-infection are lower with natural immunity that with vaccine induced immunity though so there must be some difference in the cellular machinery, I thought the STAT4 might be part of that but again I admit it is an assumption! :)

cheers, Jamie

vaccination, and if a majority get vaccinated, you've got herd immunity, and the infections don't

spread far enough to get to the unvaccinated.

avoidance trumps individual anxieties.

>
Reply to
Jamie M

playing pretend.

that you're a vaccine parasite, you don't believe they work and/or they cause harm. So you dig up

some literature you can't begin to comprehend and misinterpret it to support your idiocy.

That's one way to look at it :D I prefer to think I made an assumption that has a chance of being correct, but to each his own!

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

Why do you think this? Getting your immunity from vaccination has the definite advantage that you don't have to suffer from the other consequences of the infection to acquire the immunity.

This has everything to do with the nature of the immune system, and nothing to do with the source of the antigens which have challenged the immune system.

The immune system isn't clever enough to work out where the antigens have come from.

Vaccination merely stimulates the body's own immune system - it doesn't replace it in any way, so your "interpretation" is simply deluded nonsense.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

antigen-based immunity does lead to STAT4 generation, just like every other kind of challenge to

the immune system.

throwing in extra antigens.

vaccination, and if a majority get vaccinated, you've got herd immunity, and the infections don't

spread far enough to get to the unvaccinated.

avoidance trumps individual anxieties.

Hi,

OT in an OT thread, but what do you think of this research showing mitochondria have synchronized vibrations within individual cells and also as well over whole areas of tissue?

formatting link

cheers, Jamie

Reply to
Jamie M

don't have to suffer from the other consequences of the infection to acquire the immunity.

Hi,

The immunity provided by fighting the infection naturally is not the same as given from a vaccine, which makes sense as the body is undergoing two separate processes, one a simulated infection and one real. The level's of re-infection are higher for people who have been vaccinated than for people who have had the real infection.

of the antigens which have challenged the immune system.

No it is because the vaccine is a simulated infection, and doesn't effect the immune system in the same way as a real infection - which provides longer immunity.

cheers, Jamie

own immune system, but since they aren't therefore I think my

Reply to
Jamie M

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.