Yep! But you are also a mouse who has limited venues in which to complain.

I wonder if the vaccine causes inflammatory and other unpleasant responses when administered. If so, I wonder if those responses go away after the last dose, when the three months of protection begin.

Here are the two paragraphs that I found interesting:

> The new vaccine, for now known as GLA-3M-052-LS+OVA, mimics the T cell signals that directly stimulate innate immune cells in the lungs. It also contains a harmless antigen, an egg protein called ovalbumin or OVA, which recruits T cells into the lungs to maintain the innate response for weeks to months.

> In the study, mice were given a drop of the vaccine in their noses. Some recieved multiple doses, given a week apart. Each mouse was then exposed to one type of respiratory virus. With three doses of the vaccine, mice were protected against SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses for at least three months.

Right, that's been mentioned elsewhere.

A new area of research has opened up. This approach may be more useful for treatment than prevention. It's not really a vaccine; it's more like an induced vaccine response. Keeping the immune system in that state full time might be a problem. But after an infection, that's what's wanted.

People with severe allergies or at high risk would probably make the tradeoff even if side effects were a problem. If they're not a problem, I could see most people taking this regularly just to avoid the nuisance of respiratory infections.

Me neither, but I got something similar from the abstract that I was about to ask, so adding it here: "Following infection, vaccinated mice mounted rapid pathogen-specific T cell and antibody responses and formed ectopic lymphoid structures in the lung."

That latter term (ectopic lymphoid structure) comes up in connection with persistent inflammation where the immune system sets up camp near the problem point. Is this good or bad? Do these go away once the infection clears up?

Or worse. If it is so easy to activate, there must be an evolutionary reason why we don’t have it.

> [greater activity within] our immune systems long-term can't be healthy

Not trying to be flip, but why? "Natural" isn't always better, and as the obesity epidemic has shown, our evolutionary past hasn't done a perfect job of preparing us for our current environment.

You might be right, but I'm skeptical that there is any non-extreme limit to something as simple and mechanical as our innate immune system.

It could also be useful in low doses to supplement, for example, a seasonal vaccine in a year where they are especially unsure about prevalent strains, or where their predictions were already proved wrong early in the flu season

Cant we say this applies to the flu vaccine? This almost validates why I skip it every year.

I get sick after getting the flu vaccine and feel pretty bad for 1-3 days... then I get the flu anyway because they picked the wrong ones.

you would think so! as a "vaccine skeptic", i think this kind of research is important and patients should be able to decide w/ their doctor which to pursue based on their individual condition. perhaps this tradeoff will be worth it in higher risk individuals.

Intranasal, no jabs