| ▲ | Horatius77 4 hours ago |
| Appears that it is trying to stimulate broad immunity .. instead of any one specific virus/disease. Artificial and overstimulation of our immune systems long-term can't be healthy. Definitely a tradeoff here. |
|
| ▲ | gcanyon 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > [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. |
| |
| ▲ | Palomides an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | calling the immune system simple and mechanical is completely wild, like half of americans have some kind of medically diagnosable immune dysfunction | | |
| ▲ | gcanyon 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | The immune system operates at level far below where we get "tired" -- worrying that we'll "use up" the immune system seems similar to worrying that exercise will "use up" our lifetime allotment of heartbeats. | |
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | adrianN an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We know that systemic inflammation is associated with all kinds of chronic diseases. I don’t know whether we have figured out which causes which, but I’d be wary of overstimulating the immune system too. | |
| ▲ | SecretDreams an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Normally when your immune system is on high alert for a prolonged period of time, it can lead to more false positives and trigger auto immune issues. | | |
| ▲ | gcanyon 36 minutes ago | parent [-] | | But this is talking about the innate vs. the adaptive immune system. I am not a medical professional, but it seems like the innate system is either maladapted or not. In any case, I don't think it's fair to assume that your "common sense" overrides my skepticism. | | |
| ▲ | mcdeltat 21 minutes ago | parent [-] | | There are likely biological pros and cons between innate and adaptive, such that using the innate response for everything is not desirable. The innate response is less targeted, less effective, and causes potentially damaging effects like inflammation. The adaptive response is more targeted and more effective, with the tradeoff that it needs to be learnt. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | curtisf 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| 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 |
|
| ▲ | butILoveLife 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| 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. |
| |
| ▲ | gus_massa an hour ago | parent [-] | | The normal vaccine is very different. The inmune system learns how to block one virus or bacteria and go to rest until the virus or bacteria appears. This looks like the inmune system is keep at the emergency level for 3 months. |
|
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | dionian 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| 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. |
| |
