12 comments

  • torgoguys 2 hours ago

    I don't know much about this, but wouldn't the description of this imply you're stimulating the body to be in an a long-term situation that would be commonly viewed as unpleasant (inflamed, maybe nasal drainage, that type of thing) with the positive tradeoff that you get fewer actual infections?

    • MathMonkeyMan 2 hours ago

      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.

    • Animats an hour ago

      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.

    • rzzzt 2 hours ago

      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?

    • ivan_gammel 2 hours ago

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

      • Rexxar 16 minutes ago

        Maybe it would made the immune system age faster if it is "used" too much.

      • MarkusQ an hour ago

        Systemic cost.

        We could have paper shredders, blenders, toasters, water taps, and so on that just ran all the time, but our utility bills would be ginormous. Same thing for our bodies.

        • lokar an hour ago

          Or the risk of autoimmune disease?

  • Horatius77 33 minutes 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.

  • ajma 2 hours ago

    In mice

  • snitzr 2 hours ago

    Good news! Also, AI thumbnail defies all physical laws.

  • SilentM68 24 minutes ago

    I'd rather see permanent cures vs the need for repeated jabs: https://diedsuddenlynews.substack.com/p/declassified-cia-doc...