Vaccine breakthrough means no more chasing strains
(news.ucr.edu)
from ZeroCool@slrpnk.net to science@mander.xyz on 18 Apr 2024 01:59
https://slrpnk.net/post/8730232
from ZeroCool@slrpnk.net to science@mander.xyz on 18 Apr 2024 01:59
https://slrpnk.net/post/8730232
threaded - newest
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
As it is, the first time this was posted, biologists and pharmacists discussed the merits of the claims and came to the conclusion that this was unlikely to be real.
Specifically the approach would probably be thwarted the second time you attempted to use this method because your immune system would attack the vaccine.
The discussion also pointed out that this was why the second dose of Astrazeneca during the COVID pandemic was less effective.
Disclaimer: I’m not a medical professional and don’t pretend to be one online. I’m reciting from memory. YMMV.
Link please? Kinda feel like I shouldn’t have had to ask for that based on how you chose to begin your comment but here we are.
hexbear.net/post/2315391
Lol.
So the “biologists and pharmacologists” you are citing are just armchair scientists in the Lemmy comment section
On Hexbear, no less.
Unaccountable armchair ‘scientists’ on hexbear no less. Lol.
Also once you finally get to someone discussing the content of the paper the entire tone about plausibility changes.
Super interesting! I’m going to file this under “hope it’s true, will wait for testing/confirmation because the claims are amazing”.
I don’t vaccinate, and that is enough to get downvoted. :)
Congratulations.
Too bad that dumbass was vaccinated as an infant
Luckily for you, there’s not a vaccine for stupidity.
Yes there is, it’s just also made of toxic chemicals and increasing in price lately.
So what do you know that literally all the scientists in the world don’t?
Don’t procreate.
You’re getting down voted because your post doesn’t meaningfully contribute.
Obvious troll is obvious.
Excuse me?
Basically mice procrastinate much less than people.
Given the position of this statement in the article, I’m guessing they are trying to imply a correlation in rate of aging. Like 1 dog year = 7 human years. They are further implying that if a mouse maintains immunity for 90 days, a human would maintain immunity for 10 years.
It should be clear that it is the reporter stating this, not the original authors of the study.
I’m no cell biologist but I don’t think immunity works that way. I don’t know enough to dispute it though.
I am a molecular biologist, and it kinda works this way. B cells are called memory cells because they hold onto that “memory” of the invader for a really long time. You probably haven’t had an MMR or a Tetanus vaccine in 10+ years because the body is really good at remembering. But we have to get flu boosters every year because the flu mutates so rapidly that traditional b cells won’t recognize the flu after a year of mutating. (RNA viruses can’t correct their mutations so they change much faster than bacteria or DNA viruses). RNAi was still pretty new when I was in school and I haven’t kept up with the research so I can’t speak to it’s effectiveness at long term immunity.
I know enough about that, the part I was skeptical about though was the assumption that if a mouse is immune for 90 days, a human would be immune for 10 years.
And you are absolutely right to be skeptical about that, that is a crazy level of extrapolation.
I assumed it had to do with heartbeats. Mice hearts beat much faster than human hearts, and I think of the heartbeat like a computer’s clock or an engine’s RPM. If you increase that, the rate of everything else increases.
It is good that you recognize that you don’t know enough to dispute it. Now just recognize that people who do know enough aren’t disputing it.
You’re excused
I thought the thumbnail was a Smurf hand holding a crackpipe… I think I need to get more sleep.
Or possibly less crack.
So I can stop drinking bleach?
No more light bulbs up the arse either.
Aww man, there go my weekend plans.
Well, you can still do it if you enjoy it.