Can anyone weigh in with information as to how insulated this is from being overbearing and giving someone some form of immune deficiency syndrome?
For example, the near state-of-the-art in immune suppression is the IL-17 inhibitor. IL-17 itself is a crucial signaller for Cytokine production. And it signals a broad array of Citokines. Citokines are essential in fighting most forms of infection. So, to have side effects as bad as a modern immune suppressant, an "inverse vaccine" would have to have a generalized effect as bad as global Citokine suppression. That would be an extraordinary leap for a drug which is meant to tell T cells to ignore one specific molecule.
If autoimmune disease is a flawed concept, then treating it this way could potentially go very bad places.
If you take that gunk and analyze it with x-ray crystallography, you find that the compound in this gunk has the structure of an antibody.
I'd love to hear the intersection of Occam's razor and how you explain these findings with a theory other than autoimmune disease.
What is that something? - vaccines - toxins, pesticides? - lack of vitamin D, infrared? Something else?
Our modern medicine (pharma companies) are succeeding at making us chronically sick as that is what is more lucrative, it’s literally the matrix, we are serving the machine, not the other way around.
Whatever is causing immune problems is at the same time creating a lot of shareholder value.
A lot of countries this medication is purchased and bargained for at the government level and then provided to individuals for low cost/no cost (outside of tax).
It’s also assessed at the total population level. So I don’t know how you could convince a country (say) to buy something that makes them ill then sell them the cure. They have the efficacy data of both things.
Or are you suggesting that it is a cross industry collision, like shampoo that create diabetes, and then they sell us diabetes cures?
So, an autoimmune disease? Because that falls within the parameters of what you've described.
> What is that something? - vaccines - toxins, pesticides? - lack of vitamin D, infrared? Something else?
The question of why autoimmune diseases are becoming more common is good one. There is research that shows correlations between the incidence of autoimmune disease and vitamin D deficiency and exposure to microplastics. But as of now, these are just correlations. Causality has not been established, and there are a lot of missing links left on that road.
> Whatever is causing immune problems is at the same time creating a lot of shareholder value.
You give way too much credit to big pharma.
1. We don't know enough about autoimmune disease to know how to intentionally cause it.
2. As with many conspiracy theories, this one relies on the very improbable occurrence of tens of thousands of people keeping mum over multiple decades and not a single one of them growing a conscience at any point. Or just leaking something out of incompetence at any point.
On the side of pharma it’s mostly: work on what is lucrative, don’t kill the golden goose (fix the problem)
They have a huge incentives to keep the problems going and create a subscription model to alleviate the symptoms, not surprising, that exactly what they do.
Humira the OG biologic treatment for autoimmune conditions costs $5,000/month. There has been a gold rush by pharmaceutical companies to create humira-like drugs or new monoclonal antibodies. Enbrel, Simponi, Taltz, Rinvoq and on. They all cost thousands of dollars per month and must be taken for life.
Immune suppresant biologics has been one of the biggest profit growth areas for pharma over the last 20 years. They are all chasing it. These inverse vaccines would end that.
See also The Shirky Principle: Organizations tend to keep alive the problem they are intended to address.
California sues 5 major oil co's for campaign of deception about climate change
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37540420
And it's hardly the first time that it came to light industry insiders knew X caused harm and suppressed it for decades.
a) DNA from viral infections in previous generations (HERV, Human Endogenous Retro-Viruses), and
b) infection with a similar virus.
The HERV gives autoimmune diseases a genetic component, which is why not everyone gets them, and the infection with a similar virus (like Epstein-Barr for multiple sclerosis) triggers the body to start attacking itself because it finds the HERV. Vitamin D can help suppress the expression of HERV, so vitamin D deficiency can contribute to the problem—but it's not the root of the problem.
https://www.imrpress.com/journal/JIN/20/1/10.31083/j.jin.202...
1. Vitamin D deficiency.
2. Genetic disorder
3. Viral infection
All of which are specific causes that are potentially treatable and do not fit with "the immune system has lost its mind and is randomly attacking healthy tissue."
Relatedly, allergies are also a class of immune disorder based on misidentification. For instance, toxicodendron plants like "poison ivy" produce a harmless substance that is capable of chemically bonding to human cell membranes, which does not seem to impair the primary function of the cell, but does alter its ability to respond correctly when "interrogated" by relevant T-cells. These T-cells are immune cells which can be described as drifting through the body, randomly attaching to other cells, and then asking those cells to authenticate. The response from an affected cell is malformed, causing the T-cell to release a chemical signal which is like say "Kill everything here!". This causes other immune cells which enter the area to commence destroying friend and foe alike. More immune cells will continue to be recruited for as long as the 'kill' signal lasts. The signal will continue to be produced each time another cell fails to authenticate.
Failure to authenticate does not sound to me like "the immune system loses its mind and randomly attacks healthy tissue." It sounds more like "sometimes something messes up a normal security check and this results in security personnel being called in droves."
Kind of like SWATting.
The name dates back to the 17th century. My history is a little shaky, but as far as I can recall, the 17th century was before pharmaceuticals, pesticides and the entire industrial revolution. But maybe I need to get on that Gary Kasperov history where the Roman Empire fell in like 1940 or whatever.
Go talk to people with autoimmune diseases and then report back. There’s a good chance you’ll end up deleting your comment
Why do you think that?
Then testing this technology might prove your hypothesis.
Except a lot of studies are poorly done, humans are prone to confirmation bias, "serious" medical experiments can be awful stuff of a sort that won't get approved -- and rightly so.
Trying to get buy-in on new ideas can be shockingly hard.