The treatment also supposedly activates macrophages in the lungs (and thus not elsewhere). Only some small particles and vapor droplets from foods go into the lungs.
Right and if that is such a good thing why are those macrophages not always on alert. I smell longterm cancer or similar.
>There may also be consequences to dialling up the immune system beyond its normal state – raising questions of immune disorders.
> Jonathan Ball, professor of molecular virology at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, said the work was undeniably "exciting" but cautioned "we have to ensure that keeping the body on 'high alert' doesn't lead to friendly fire, where a hyper-ready immune system accidentally triggers unwelcome side effects".
> The research team in the US does not think the immune system should be permanently dialled up and think such a vaccine should be used to compliment rather than replace current vaccines.
Or simply autoimmune reactions which can be devastating.
The target does matter, that is the basis for the whole technology, and the thing most predictive of efficacy. That's why the flu shots often don't work and the shots for smallpox and measles do, the flu is a more rapidly mutating target.
Going crazy with the adjuvants was popular during the pandemic when it became clear that the virus had mutated (the target protein), but no one wanted to do R&D for a new target. Counting white blood cells became a proxy for efficacy, and you can manipulate that stat with adjuvants.
The body is like legacy spaghetti code written by hundreds of teams of outsourced engineers. It mostly works. Just never remove any commented out lines or it may break.
Naming departs from technical accuracy when adopted by the masses, as they retrofit their common understanding. Wouldn't be too surprised if "vaccine" ends up covering other strong defense-boosters.
https://knowingfabric.com/mushroom-leather-mycelium-sustaina...
is pretty neat
"toll like receptors"
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7173040/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135964462...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40364-022-00436-7
The world: Announces cures for half a dozen cancers, and the common cold
botusaurus•2h ago
there's probably a reason evolution didnt put the immune system on permanent "amber alert" as they call it in the article
Angostura•1h ago
kojacklives•1h ago
Larrikin•1h ago
I personally look forward to every innovation that potentially improves our baseline.
aaa_aaa•1h ago
thomquaid•1h ago
javascriptfan69•40m ago
You can just stop taking antibiotics and vaccines.
Those are way more interesting odds.
wizzwizz4•4m ago
You wouldn't want to get vaccinated for smallpox in the middle of a plague epidemic, because that would waste your immune system's resources on an extinct-in-the-wild disease, when it really needs to be gearing up to stop the plague killing you.
dekhn•40m ago
They speculated that immune systems evolved to avoid being continuously on alert. And that's exactly right- our immune systems have an extremely complicated system for detecting foreign invaders that is tightly regulated. And a failure to regulate that is often associated with autoimmune disorders, which remain very poorly understood.
I've studied biology from the perspective of engineering better drugs for decades now and I can say with confidence that I simply don't understand how the immune system works, and I don't think anybody else really does either (compared to, say, the heart, or many biological systems like protein production). We have identified many players, and observed a great deal of actions, and have speculative models for many of the underlying processes, but we don't really have an "understanding" of the immune system. I skimmed this paper and frankly, it has a very long way to go before people are convinced to try this in human clinical trials.
I look forward to innovations, but to a first order approximation: evolution found model parameters that exceed the best human science and engineering.
amelius•1h ago
Amber alert means something different than the author thinks ...
RupertSalt•1h ago
kazinator•53m ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Alert
This is just an idiom for denoting a high alert state.
renewiltord•1h ago
Until we find out why nature made it so some of us kill ourselves maybe we shouldn't fuck with it? Remember Chesterton's Fence.
thomquaid•1h ago
lanyard-textile•1h ago
"Sorry son, you can't get these glasses. It's for the betterment of humanity."
mikestorrent•1h ago
lanyard-textile•34m ago
You just don't know sometimes.
krapp•1h ago
Remember that cephalopod brains are donut shaped and their digestive tracts go right through the middle and if they eat something too big they'll have an anyeurism. Pandas and koalas evolved special diets that serve no evolutionary purpose and both would be extinct if humans didn't find them cute. Sloths have to climb down from trees to take a shit. Female hyenas give birth through a pseudopenis that often ruptures and kils them. Horses can't vomit and if they swallow something toxic, their stomach ruptures. Also their hooves and ankles are extremely weak and not well designed to support their weight. Numerous species like the fiddler crab and peacock have evolved sexual displays that are actively harmful to their survival.
And as for humans, our spines are not well adapted for walking upright, our retinas are wired backwards, and we still have a useless appendix and wisdom teeth. The recurrent laryngeal nerve has an unnecessarily long and complex route branching off the vagus and travelling around the aorta before running back up to the larynx.
Evolution is not smart. Evolution isn't even stupid. It isn't trying to keep you alive and it isn't even capable of caring if you die. Yes we should absolutely fuck with it, because we don't want to live in a world where we still die of sepsis and parasites and plagues because "we don't want to mess with evolution."
dabinat•1h ago
mat_b•1h ago
krapp•1h ago
In my defense, domestication is still technically an evolutionary process.
shiroiuma•28m ago
protocolture•1h ago
Koalas biggest problem is us? Like they seem perfectly adapted to their niche. Eat lots of leaves that nobody else is adapted to use as food, and once a year, run very fast to outpace the bushfire that your principle food source needs to reproduce.
shiroiuma•30m ago
This was believed in the 20th century, but we now believe the appendix is actually useful, and is basically a fail-safe in case the intestinal flora are wiped out; some will survive in the appendix and repopulate the intestine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appendix_(anatomy)#Functions
akersten•1h ago
mikestorrent•1h ago
boothby•1h ago
dekhn•33m ago
Now, you could have restated this in a better way IMHO. I'd put it like this: are there any evolutionary advantages to having worse-than-average near or far vision? For example, we can imagine that people who had extremely good long range vision would be more successful in hunting, and perhaps- this is where I'm speculating heavily- having poor long vision is compensated by having better detail vision for fine tool work. However, what I've learned after many years is that attempting to perceive the true nature of the evolutionary fitness function is challenging.
As for your bit about suicide: please be a lot more thoughtful in speculating about suicide.
giarc•1h ago
It would just be temporary, but there is likely trade offs.