Slashdot Mirror
Re-Engineering the Immune System
destinyland notes a microbiology professor describing "Immunity on Demand" (or "Immunity 2.0") and wonders whether we could genetically engineer all the antibodies we need. "...there's a good chance this system, or something like it, will actually be in place within decades. Caltech scientists have already engineered stem cells into B cells that produce HIV-fighting antibodies — and an NIH researcher engineered T cells that recognize tumors which has already had promising clinical trials again skin cancer. Our best hope may be to cut out the middleman. Rather than merely hoping that the vaccine will indirectly lead to the antibody an individual needs, imagine if we could genetically engineer these antibodies and make them available as needed?"
That we can't actually see a majority of diseases under a microscope, only the antibodies our bodies produce to fight it off. Has that part been a myth or have we merely technologically advanced past that?
I find it difficult for us to engineer an antibody to fight against something we haven't actually detected yet.
I have to ask, b/c I don't know, but could this lead to lazy-, or even more inept immune systems?
If the exogenous antibodies end up hitting the wrong cells in some people, there could be major problems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoimmunity Although I would expect that there would be some sort of pre-compatibility test to avoid major complications - but you can't realistically pre-test every cell type via biopsy.
If you think that the whack-jobs are ballistic about vaccines, wait they go off the rails for something like this!
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Lets cure all natural causes of death through the miracle of modern science.
Then starve to death as the world becomes grossly overpopulated.
The immune system isn't some kind of muscle, it doesn't really have "strength" in some neatly scalar way(OK, if your T-cell count is completely in the tank, you'd have a case for saying that your immune system is "weak").
You acquire immunity based on exposure to particular agents. If a new disease comes along, your immune system won't be properly trained no matter what you've been doing before. That is what makes it a "new" disease. Plus, the whole point of this approach would be that you could engineer antibodies on demand for the new disease, and take them before it kills you.
The immune system will, given time, almost always come up with antibodies and mount a response; but some conditions will kill you good and hard before you have time to mount that response. This is why vaccines are useful(since they provoke the same or similar response; but are harmless, so your immune system isn't racing against the clock). If you could engineer the antibodies themselves, you could get even faster response, and have something that would work even once you are infected.
It would, essentially, allow you to apply the technique that we currently use in Antivenom agents to diseases generally.
Move to a country with free healthcare?
Seriously, paying for medicine is so 19th century.
Here's hoping I don't die before they invent invincibility... biologically speaking of course :)
Personally, I'm hoping they invent immortality instead. I've looked at the curves and honestly, relatively few people die "before their time" because we've become rather good at medicine but we've made very little impact on prolonging the real life span barring injury or disease. Very few of us, even those young today, will live to be 100 unless there's some real medical breakthroughs on repairing and restoring body and mind. If our bodies could stay like a 20 year old's forever, we could live to be a thousand years old already. The mortality rate for a 20 year old is <0,001.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
You need to come up with some better phrasing for that, you are suggesting that back in the 19th century, we had to pay for medicine, rather than having slaves like we do today.
You should probably use 'universal health care' instead of 'free health care', and speak about not charging for it at the point of delivery.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
I'll stick with a doctor who isn't an agent of the government, thanks.
Hmm. No public schools, no govt scholarships, doesn't take medicare patients, no medical license, no business license, doesn't cooperate with the CDC, ... That leaves us with what, one master herbalist in Berkley?
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
... for 20 years. They were called "Navy doctors". They had all the latest technology, were extremely skilled, and... free. Of course, taxpayer dollars were paying them, but 1) total costs per person in the military are a hell of a lot less than the mess we have going on in the world of private health insurance, and 2) for the cost of something like the Iraq war, we could have provided health coverage for the entire country for like 15 years. So it's not like we can't afford it.
People who bitch about "socialized medicine" should try it some time.
I don't buy it. Every population has some members with autoimmune diseases. But the Black death reached its peak in Europe.
A lot of != all.
Certainly it's hard to argue that the strongest selective pressure for Europeans hasn't been for resistance to the plague (and other communicable diseases).
The enemies of Democracy are
Incorrect:
"to keep us from getting sick."
Correct:
"to keep us from getting a sickness, again."
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"a representative or official of a government or administrative department of a government."
Yes, and the statement was so stupid it deserved nothing more then ridicule.
Which part of:
"...promote the general Welfare..." do you not understand?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on