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?"

49 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Dangers of the right thing by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Informative

    Smarting up our immune system could turn to be a dumb idea, as a good part of us comes from virus

    1. Re:Dangers of the right thing by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actally having too strong an immune system IS bad; that's what arthritis is, your body's immune system attacking you. But having bioengineered antibodies would ge great.

      Too bad it will be "a few decades", I'll be dead by then.

    2. Re:Dangers of the right thing by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually there is a theory that a lot of the autoimmune dieses we get are and artifact of the Black Death.
      Those with a very strong immune system lived so now our immune systems maybe a little too good for our own good.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:Dangers of the right thing by g00ey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wouldn't agree to that. Autoimmune diseases such as arthritis and allergies is rather a sign that the immune system is "out of tune", not too strong. This means that the immune system is wasting its limited resources on the wrong thing.

    4. Re:Dangers of the right thing by jonadab · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh, and then you've got allergies, in which case your immune system isn't directly attacking you per se, but it's overactively attacking something it doesn't really need to, and you're sort of getting caught in the crossfire.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    5. Re:Dangers of the right thing by the_humeister · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't buy it. Every population has some members with autoimmune diseases. But the Black death reached its peak in Europe.

    6. Re:Dangers of the right thing by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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
  2. Someone needs an editor by wrencherd · · Score: 5, Funny

    From TFA:

    "We are not sure when this will all happen, but there’s a good chance it will, and perhaps the only question is when."

    Hmmmmm . . .

    1. Re:Someone needs an editor by osu-neko · · Score: 2, Funny

      From TFA:

      "We are not sure when this will all happen, but there’s a good chance it will, and perhaps the only question is when."

      Hmmmmm . . .

      Very likely it'll be in a couple decades. I remember reading that back in the 80s.

      Oh, wait...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  3. Funny phrasing by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Funny

    Derya Unutmaz is an Associate Professor of Microbiology and Pathology at N.Y.U. School of Medicine. His current research is focused on understanding the function of human immune system.

    I can tell him right now what the function of the human immune system is: to keep us from getting sick.

    I'll take his grant money now.

    1. Re:Funny phrasing by interkin3tic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      100 pages? Well that's no fair, Nature usually doesn't take articles longer than 5 pages.

    2. Re:Funny phrasing by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Incorrect:

      "to keep us from getting sick."

      Correct:
      "to keep us from getting a sickness, again."

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. Unintended Consequences? by assemblyronin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FTA:

    All this is, of course, a delicate proposition. In some ways, an overactive immune system is as much of a risk as an underactive one: more than a million people worldwide a year die from collateral damage, like septic shock after bacterial infection, and inflammations that may ultimately induce chronic illness such as heart disease and perhaps even cancer.

    This is just one possible outcome to programming new antibodies. I'd also be concerned with how the treatments mitigate any risk to shutting down our own immune system.

    Hypothetical speculation: Say the treatment works well while you're taking regular doses of new Immunity 2.0 shots, but as soon as you can't afford to pay anymore, you're off the Immunity 2.0 shots. Well, it's been a while since your real immune system has had to work, so the next mutation of a virus comes along and 'oops'.

    Most questions to risk will probably be found in lab research and trials, but it's still something to think about.

    1. Re:Unintended Consequences? by Patch86 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Move to a country with free healthcare?

      Seriously, paying for medicine is so 19th century.

    2. Re:Unintended Consequences? by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.
    3. Re:Unintended Consequences? by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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
    4. Re:Unintended Consequences? by samkass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'll stick with a doctor who isn't an agent of the government, thanks.

      You mean like Canada?

      There are a lot of systems by which you can accomplish universal health care. The UK version in which doctors are federal employees is one, but the Canadian system where the federal government is essentially the insurer is another. Another option is the system that the current US reform bill proposes which is very similar to the Republican one from the early 90's. The only really bad option is doing nothing.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    5. Re:Unintended Consequences? by ultranova · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, it's been a while since your real immune system has had to work, so the next mutation of a virus comes along and 'oops'.

      Your real immune system is working all the time, fighting more simultaneous and endless wars than the United States. Leave a piece of meat on the table and take note how long it takes before all the bacteria, fungi and insects notice it's there. Now remember that you are made of meat.

      You only notice your immune system when something manages to get a foothold, but that doesn't mean that it isn't working at the other times.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:Unintended Consequences? by azenpunk · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. An agent of some entity is specifically one who is acting on their behalf. Having a government issued medical license does not make one an agent of the government, the clerk behind the counter at the licensing agency is the agent of government. Accepting payments from Medicare does not make one an agent of the government, the claim reviewer deciding if a claim is covered by Medicare and then if Medicare should pay out is the agent of government. Cooperation with the CDC does not make one an agent of the government. Allowing the government to dictate the advice one gives as a doctor does make one an agent of the government, as recently was reported in the UK. Doctors were mandated to give advice on lowering patients carbon footprint, such advice is not medical in nature and has no business coming from a doctor unsolicited. What do public schools have to do with a doctor being an agent of government?

    7. Re:Unintended Consequences? by mindfarms · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is a very valid point. The creation of Products that "require" continued use in the interest of (so called) continued good health is nothing new to the Pharmaceutical Industries. Read the fine print (really fine print) on the tiny hand-out included with most prescribed drugs and you will see what I mean. Most of them point out dangerous and undesirable results if you DISCONTINUE the medication. The Internet Marketing Industry grabbed that concept and introduced it as a New Concept... called Forced Continuity, LOL.

      --
      Free Training for Internet Marketers http://IMarketerSupply.com
    8. Re:Unintended Consequences? by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "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 /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  5. Obligatory tag... by caladine · · Score: 2, Funny

    whatcouldpossiblygowrong

    On a more serious note, this looks promising. I just hope we don't rush into this. The immune system runs a delicate balance, over response is nearly as dangerous as not enough. More research needed.

  6. Re:I was under the impression by Mortiss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, we will still leave our immune system to handle the unknown. However the concept of either enabling a mass and cheap production of specific antibodies against viruses like HIV or transferring the antibody producing B cells into our bodies is certainly interesting. I was under the impression that his was not done earlier mainly due to the prohibitive costs of treating everyone this way. Given that there is still no effective vaccine this may actually become viable prevention or treatment option.

  7. And then when a new disease cones along ... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Informative

    And then when a new disease comes along, our immune system is not properly trained, and we'll die.

    Remember that the native Americans dies from illnesses which were relatively harmless for the Europeans, because they just didn't have all those illnesses there.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    1. Re:And then when a new disease cones along ... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:And then when a new disease cones along ... by mariox19 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I seem to remember reading something that contradicts what you're saying.

      As I recall, some scientists are wondering if vaccinating children against chickenpox is having an adverse affect on the adult population who have had chickenpox. Since kids aren't carrying the active virus, adults are exposed to it less. It seems like routine exposure may actually help keep our immune systems primed. The result is, since more immune systems are "out of practice," so to speak, more adults are contracting shingles.

      Disclaimer: I have no science background to start with, and I'm recounting this from memory. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    3. Re:And then when a new disease cones along ... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can definitely have "strength" with respect to a particular disease, or class of closely related diseases. That is pretty much how the immune response works. Grandparent seemed to be talking about the case of exposure to one disease, followed by exposure to something entirely different. The "practice" in the case of the first disease would indeed make you more resistant to future occurrences of that one; but wouldn't make a difference in terms of your response to something novel.

    4. Re:And then when a new disease cones along ... by maxume · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This seems to be what you are talking about:

      http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/09/01/12896.aspx

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  8. Lazy immune system? by wrencherd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have to ask, b/c I don't know, but could this lead to lazy-, or even more inept immune systems?

  9. Re:I was under the impression by eparker05 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For most diseases the antibodies are easier to see because they are more widespread. It only takes a few virally infected cells to set off a massive immune response. The difficulty in engineering an antibody is the same difficulty as engineering any protein. Our knowledge of protein folding is still in it's infancy. So far, we have used evolutionary methods to find new antibodies. Perhaps someday we will be able to build them from the ground up, but not now.

  10. I for one by wintercolby · · Score: 2, Funny

    welcome our new zombie overlords.

    --
    Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. --Aldous Huxley
  11. autoimmunity could be a major side-effect by bzdyelnik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:autoimmunity could be a major side-effect by izomiac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree. Autoimmunity seems like it'll kill this idea unless they take some pretty extreme measures to get around it. Each person is genetically different. There are a lot of potential antigens for an antibody to recognize. With our own immune system there are (imperfect) mechanisms to kill any B or T cell that recognizes something inappropriate. With genetically engineered antibodies, this step is skipped entirely. In fact, I suspect this step is why we don't form natural antibodies to some diseases... especially since our immune cells are obviously capable of doing so in a test tube.

  12. Boy, Howdy! by overshoot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you think that the whack-jobs are ballistic about vaccines, wait they go off the rails for something like this!

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Boy, Howdy! by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 3, Informative

      A pity about their children suffering from their parent's stupidity, but maybe they'll wise up once they grow up.

      Alas, not just their own unfortunate kids. Ever read about Dana McCaffery? She was too young to be vaccinated, and she died of pertussis that the anti-vaxxers brought back. Then one of the local pro-disease dumbasses went and said that no one ever died of pertussis.

  13. Too much Sci-fi by COMON$ · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe I have been reading too much sci-fi lately but arent we closer to using nanotech as an immune system than using biological sources?

    --
    CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
  14. Re:Hey, awesome... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lets cure all natural causes of death through the miracle of modern science.
    Then starve to death as the world becomes grossly overpopulated.

    Don't worry. The human race is so effective at killing each other that most people won't starve anyway.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  15. Star Trek did it by 0racle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wasn't there a Star Trek: TNG episode where they did this? Remember how everyone who wasn't engineered was dying?

    Na, that'll never happen.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
  16. auto immune system response by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey wouldn't it be great if our bodies did this automatically...

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  17. Re:Here's hoping... by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  18. Re:I was under... by sonnejw0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a Biologist, and you're somewhat mistaken. Antibodies are so infinitesimally tiny that no light microscope can possibly see them, even compared to virii which are also fairly invisible under a microscope. Antibodies are easy to detect, however, because they have a constant region on their tail end, which we know how to identify. We have compounds that bind to that constant tail end and as a result tag the antibody and what it is binding to. It's like the antibody is a flag pole, and biologists can run a colorful flag up that pole when we want to see what piece of the ground the flag pole is attached to.

    Engineering antibodies is a simple matter, it's the basis of immunization/vaccination. Traditionally, we give chopped up bacteria and virii to a patient and their immune system detects those and creates more antibodies to put into the blood stream to stave off future infection. With this approach, instead we feed immune cells in a Petri dish an antigen, and they produce antibodies specific to that antigen. We can separate out these antibodies and purify them because they have that constant tail region that we can detect. We can then inject these into a person and these antibodies will cling to whatever thing they've been engineered to detect and attract the native immune system to it.

    We can also use genetic engineering tricks to produce en masse a single specific kind of antibody. The technology has been there for research labs for decades. Either method will work fairly similarly, but in my opinion the former seems "easier", because we let the cells sort out what specific antibody to make. If we genetically engineer immune cells, we have to know exactly what gene sequence will produce an antibody targetting exactly what we want targetted ... which is good if we know what the antibody gene sequence is already, but difficult to figure out on our own. Nature is much more efficient (and cost effective) at that kind of thing. Once we let nature figure out what's best, we can just figure out the gene sequence from there to mass produce the antibody.

  19. I had doctors who were agents of the gov't... by sean.peters · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... 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.

  20. Re:I was under the impression by StellarFury · · Score: 2, Informative

    Your impression was very, very wrong. Not only can we see most disease-causing agents with electron microscopes, we have X-ray and/or NMR crystal structures of a huge number of viruses - meaning we know, down to a "where each individual atom is" level of accuracy, what these things look like.

  21. Re:Hey, awesome... by osu-neko · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Lets cure all natural causes of death through the miracle of modern science. Then starve to death as the world becomes grossly overpopulated.

    Problem: All evidence suggests the opposite. Eliminate all the most egregious morality concerns from a population, and they stop reproducing like rabbits. In the healthiest parts of the first word, population growth is going negative.

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  22. Re:I was under... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    > I'm a Biologist

    > virii

    So it's the biologists who are screwing up this beautiful language! The enemy is within the gates!

  23. Re:I was under the impression by Rei · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've always wondered whether some day it might be possible to have an implant that wirelessly receives new data definitions of proteins expressed by various pathogens and have it express the protein in a way that will trigger an immune response. Hence, you can automatically update everybody's immunity. Sort of like a computer virus scanner. "Oh, H10N7 has mutated into a virulent form and is now killing people in Taipei? Everyone within a 300 mile radius of Taipei with an implant who doesn't have a counterindication for it will start expressing antibodies to H10N7."

    Obviously not everyone would *have* to have such an implant. But I'd certainly want one. Basically, an automatic flu shot every year, an automatic immunization against pandemics, an automatic immunization in case of biological attack, an automatic immunization against cancer-causing viruses, etc. Whenever an immunization passed FDA approval, if you were ever at risk for it, you could get it. You could even have such implants have two-way communication. If they could isolate what has made you sick, or even just what antibodies your body is producing to attack what's making you sick, they could submit that information for central analysis and outbreak control.

    --
    Kneel Before Christ!
  24. Herd immunity by overshoot · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ever read about Dana McCaffery? [danamccaffery.com] She was too young to be vaccinated, and she died of pertussis that the anti-vaxxers brought back.

    To be fair, pertussis is an environmental bacterium and is pretty common in adults -- it doesn't need anti-vaxx (aka "pro-disease") loons to "bring [i] back."

    Not so measles -- that's one we could actually send off to join smallpox in the annals of extinct pathogenic viruses. Or we could, if it weren't for people like Andrew Wakefield, who saw a chance to make some money by killing children in the UK. Thus we have babies too young to be vaccinated contracting measles in their paediatricians' waiting rooms because somebody took their unvaccinated darlings to Switzerland and when they came back the little darlings came down sick. http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Jenny_McCarthy_Body_Count/Home.html

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  25. Re:I was under the impression by xOneca · · Score: 2, Insightful

    [...] to have an implant that wirelessly receives new data definitions of proteins expressed by various pathogens and have it express the protein in a way that will trigger an immune response. [...] Basically, an automatic flu shot every year, an automatic immunization against pandemics, an automatic immunization in case of biological attack, an automatic immunization against cancer-causing viruses, etc.

    Wait until someone enters through your backdoor and pushes your big red button of self-destruction.

  26. Re:I was under the impression by Jurily · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've always wondered whether some day it might be possible to have an implant that wirelessly receives new data definitions of proteins expressed by various pathogens and have it express the protein in a way that will trigger an immune response. Hence, you can automatically update everybody's immunity. Sort of like a computer virus scanner.

    Microsoft Vaccine 2000 is configuring your immune system. This may take a few minutes. If your body stops responding for a long time and there is no brain activity please die. Setup will continue after you are reborn.