This is really an excellent overview of the complexities of the immune system. Working in the field of HLA for nearly 25 years I had never actually considered that everyone (based on their HLA) basically presents specific antigens on the surface of their cells. This has got me thinking a lot about what the "vaccine" was hoping to accomplish - I find the cartoons describing what goes on when you are vaccinated with a mRNA shot rather cartoonish (I highly doubt a whole spike protein is gonna make it to the surface of the cell being that it is 3800bp long) - short peptides found in the cell are routinely presented by HLA antigens on the surface of nearly all cells (which are recognized by immune surveillance cells such as dendritic cells or NK cells - cell-mediated immunity is brilliant). I suppose if a vaccine infected cell was lysed then whole spike could get out of the cells. But it does make me wonder if everyone is creating antibodies to the mRNA generated spike according to their unique HLA. I am also wondering about the actual nature of the mRNA generated spike protein considering the use of pseudouridine and codon optimization (exactly how similar is this to an actual SARS-COV-2 spike) - what sort of studies were done to see if this is the case?
On a lighter note I did enjoy the supplemental material (footnote 16) since I was infected with the Wuhan strain and I do know my HLA type - seems I might have some pretty good antibodies (as I was exposed several times to people who were infected with Omicron, but I never got infected again - and I am forced to test every week for my job.)
And, one slight correction to footnote 13 - graft v host disease overwhelmingly refers to bone marrow transplantation and not organ transplants (it very rarely occurs, but when it does it is caused by blood products not being properly flushed from the organ - it's like an organ transplant with a side of bone marrow - the transplanted organ cannot hurt the recipient, but the recipient's immune system can definitely kill the organ - that is simply called graft rejection). Solid organ matching is not precise and many times it is solely based on unacceptable antigens (if they know your body will kill an organ, then you won't get it - otherwise you will be on immunosuppressive drugs for life). The problem with bone marrow transplants is that those cells will inhabit every part of your body and if those cells recognize your body as foreign they will attempt to destroy you - the good news is that immunosuppressive drugs can usually control this until your new bone marrow becomes tolerant of its new host.
It's all really awfully fascinating - I am never not in awe of the immune system! I just wish people would trust their immune systems - and perhaps treat it better! Thank you for delving into this topic!
Well that is rather interesting Clarisse. I don't believe that has been taken into account. I suppose the assumption is that people would either be expressing the whole spike, but I didn't take into account if spike epitopes may be expressed on the surface of the cell via Class I HLA molecules, and that difference in expression may actually filter the antibody response. That would be really interesting and something worth looking into.
Whoops about the bone marrow information! I'll correct that information with your quote! Thanks for pointing it out, it's always why it's good to have other people critique your work!
Jul 11, 2022·edited Jul 11, 2022Liked by Modern Discontent
Great article. I suspect very strongly that our immune systems are still way too complex for the so called "immunology", and therefore "immunologists" cannot yet predict any outcomes that actually matter.
This is okay since science takes time to develop. But I am always suspicious of "immunologists" making sweeping pronouncements, because I suspect that they do not know enough.
It's made even worse when immunologists team up with epidemiologists and then all of our information is based on empty mathematical models that don't amount to much!
I just want all of this to be an indication that many things are going on and we can't really just look at one study and extrapolate a ton from it.
Maybe I'm just stupid, but it doesn't seem like there's a clear delineation between the innate and adaptive immune systems. For example, IgA is often treated as part of the innate immune system, yet we develop antigen specific IgA antibodies after infection. Wouldn't that make it part of the adaptive immune system as well?
I had COVID-19 in January, my IgG Semi-quantitative S Protein test came back negative at the six week mark. I've been around a lot of covid positive people since then and I've remained healthy. It's pretty obvious that relying on blood markers is going to miss out on a lot of the immune activity occurring at the site of infection.
I believe it actually is. I think part of the hyper-inflammatory response is actually contributed to the innate immune system. They both work together, yet as we get older we move more towards relying on adaptive immunity. I think there's an issue of messaging where there generally isn't a flowline that shows how both the innate and adaptive immune responses play a part and work together to clear out a virus. I think we usually believe that the innate immune system goes first and does some of its job while the adaptive immune system builds up memory and then eventually takes over.
I've argued that there's a big delineation with how we test using nasal swabs yet we check the blood for antibody levels. Why haven't we looked extensively into the nose and the immune response there? There's also been a lot of questions as to whether intramuscular injections in the delts can activate the mucosal immune system of the nose.
Well Allen, I suppose we can agree to disagree. I don't believe in the idea that COVID is a myth or an abstraction that was utilized by those in power. I think we can argue that those in power will find any avenues to exert their authority, and there doesn't necessarily need to be a pretend illness to do so.
Granted, I will argue that the response to COVID has been so catastrophic and almost universally unnecessary. I also believe that people can have differing opinions and they should be able to disagree. So we both may differ, but we can express our differing viewpoints.
You know, I'm going to blame this on this specific article being a part of Friday's article before I clipped it from there, then added even more that it kind of took on a separate life!
And thank you, hopefully even with all the weirdness the information is somewhat coherent!
This is really an excellent overview of the complexities of the immune system. Working in the field of HLA for nearly 25 years I had never actually considered that everyone (based on their HLA) basically presents specific antigens on the surface of their cells. This has got me thinking a lot about what the "vaccine" was hoping to accomplish - I find the cartoons describing what goes on when you are vaccinated with a mRNA shot rather cartoonish (I highly doubt a whole spike protein is gonna make it to the surface of the cell being that it is 3800bp long) - short peptides found in the cell are routinely presented by HLA antigens on the surface of nearly all cells (which are recognized by immune surveillance cells such as dendritic cells or NK cells - cell-mediated immunity is brilliant). I suppose if a vaccine infected cell was lysed then whole spike could get out of the cells. But it does make me wonder if everyone is creating antibodies to the mRNA generated spike according to their unique HLA. I am also wondering about the actual nature of the mRNA generated spike protein considering the use of pseudouridine and codon optimization (exactly how similar is this to an actual SARS-COV-2 spike) - what sort of studies were done to see if this is the case?
On a lighter note I did enjoy the supplemental material (footnote 16) since I was infected with the Wuhan strain and I do know my HLA type - seems I might have some pretty good antibodies (as I was exposed several times to people who were infected with Omicron, but I never got infected again - and I am forced to test every week for my job.)
And, one slight correction to footnote 13 - graft v host disease overwhelmingly refers to bone marrow transplantation and not organ transplants (it very rarely occurs, but when it does it is caused by blood products not being properly flushed from the organ - it's like an organ transplant with a side of bone marrow - the transplanted organ cannot hurt the recipient, but the recipient's immune system can definitely kill the organ - that is simply called graft rejection). Solid organ matching is not precise and many times it is solely based on unacceptable antigens (if they know your body will kill an organ, then you won't get it - otherwise you will be on immunosuppressive drugs for life). The problem with bone marrow transplants is that those cells will inhabit every part of your body and if those cells recognize your body as foreign they will attempt to destroy you - the good news is that immunosuppressive drugs can usually control this until your new bone marrow becomes tolerant of its new host.
It's all really awfully fascinating - I am never not in awe of the immune system! I just wish people would trust their immune systems - and perhaps treat it better! Thank you for delving into this topic!
Well that is rather interesting Clarisse. I don't believe that has been taken into account. I suppose the assumption is that people would either be expressing the whole spike, but I didn't take into account if spike epitopes may be expressed on the surface of the cell via Class I HLA molecules, and that difference in expression may actually filter the antibody response. That would be really interesting and something worth looking into.
Whoops about the bone marrow information! I'll correct that information with your quote! Thanks for pointing it out, it's always why it's good to have other people critique your work!
Great article. I suspect very strongly that our immune systems are still way too complex for the so called "immunology", and therefore "immunologists" cannot yet predict any outcomes that actually matter.
This is okay since science takes time to develop. But I am always suspicious of "immunologists" making sweeping pronouncements, because I suspect that they do not know enough.
It's made even worse when immunologists team up with epidemiologists and then all of our information is based on empty mathematical models that don't amount to much!
I just want all of this to be an indication that many things are going on and we can't really just look at one study and extrapolate a ton from it.
Thanks Igor!
Maybe I'm just stupid, but it doesn't seem like there's a clear delineation between the innate and adaptive immune systems. For example, IgA is often treated as part of the innate immune system, yet we develop antigen specific IgA antibodies after infection. Wouldn't that make it part of the adaptive immune system as well?
I had COVID-19 in January, my IgG Semi-quantitative S Protein test came back negative at the six week mark. I've been around a lot of covid positive people since then and I've remained healthy. It's pretty obvious that relying on blood markers is going to miss out on a lot of the immune activity occurring at the site of infection.
I believe it actually is. I think part of the hyper-inflammatory response is actually contributed to the innate immune system. They both work together, yet as we get older we move more towards relying on adaptive immunity. I think there's an issue of messaging where there generally isn't a flowline that shows how both the innate and adaptive immune responses play a part and work together to clear out a virus. I think we usually believe that the innate immune system goes first and does some of its job while the adaptive immune system builds up memory and then eventually takes over.
I've argued that there's a big delineation with how we test using nasal swabs yet we check the blood for antibody levels. Why haven't we looked extensively into the nose and the immune response there? There's also been a lot of questions as to whether intramuscular injections in the delts can activate the mucosal immune system of the nose.
There was no pandemic- EVER.
Amidst all of your good work it is important to desist in furthering the lie that there ever was a pandemic.
“COVID” is a myth. Every time you repeat the term without challenging it at its basis you are helping to perpetuate the myth.
Well Allen, I suppose we can agree to disagree. I don't believe in the idea that COVID is a myth or an abstraction that was utilized by those in power. I think we can argue that those in power will find any avenues to exert their authority, and there doesn't necessarily need to be a pretend illness to do so.
Granted, I will argue that the response to COVID has been so catastrophic and almost universally unnecessary. I also believe that people can have differing opinions and they should be able to disagree. So we both may differ, but we can express our differing viewpoints.
You know, I'm going to blame this on this specific article being a part of Friday's article before I clipped it from there, then added even more that it kind of took on a separate life!
And thank you, hopefully even with all the weirdness the information is somewhat coherent!