Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Move Closer To a Universal Flu Vaccine

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Vaccines for most diseases typically work for years or decades but with the flu, next fall it will be time to get another dose. Now Carl Zimmer writes that a flurry of recent studies on the virus has brought some hope for a change as flu experts foresee a time when seasonal flu shots are a thing of the past, replaced by long-lasting vaccines. 'That's the goal: two shots when you're young, and then boosters later in life' says Dr. Gary Nabel, predicting that scientists would reach that goal before long: 'in our lifetime, for sure, unless you're 90 years old.' Today's flu vaccines protect people from the virus by letting them make antibodies in advance but a traditional flu vaccine can protect against only flu viruses with a matching hemagglutinin protein. If a virus evolves a different shape, the antibodies cannot latch on, and it escapes destruction. Scientists have long wondered whether they could escape this evolutionary cycle with a universal flu vaccine that would to attack a part of the virus that changes little from year to year so now researchers are focusing on target antigens which are highly conserved between different influenza A virus subtypes. 'Universal vaccination with universal vaccines would put an end to the threat of global disaster that pandemic influenza can cause,' says Dr. Sara Gilbert."

7 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Accelerated Evolution by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So could we kill off all the 'typical' flu viruses allowing the evolution of something more aggressive?

    Probably not inconceivable; but there are a couple of points to consider: TFA mentions targeting structures that are 'highly conserved' between different virus subtypes. Typically(and I am not a molecular biologist, so feel free to cringe and/or correct me) the fact that a structure is 'highly conserved' between genetically distinct populations means that it is extremely important for some reason. Mutations happen(and very, very fast in influenza), so regions that aren't life-critical can diverge significantly over time. Life-critical regions, on the other hand, do experience mutations; but most of the mutants die. The degree of conservation across genetic lineages that diverged at a known period in the past can tell you a lot about how important that area is, even if you don't yet know exactly what it does.

    Second, while this also doesn't preclude a really nasty bug, it is important to remember that diseases aren't little agents playing Pandemic 2 and trying for a high score. Killing your host can be a viable strategy, if you gain enough from doing so; but (in the very weak sense that mindless evolving virues can even have 'goals') the 'goal' isn't body count, it's survival and reproduction. Very high mortality is frequently counterproductive, because hosts die faster than the disease can spread to new ones. In broad strokes, high mortality tends to occur when a novel pathogen shows up for the first time; but ends up being selected against over time(see the classic attempt to use Myxoma virus against feral rabbits in Australia).

  2. Re:good vaccine by DrgnDancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah: Polio, Smallpox, Scarlet Fever, Malaria, Plague, Anthrax; all of those have historically been defeated by "exercise and vitamins and good food". That's why hardly anyone dies from them anymore. No, wait, sorry, my bad. It's because of vaccines, antibiotics, and sanitation. I always get those mixed up too.

    --
    I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
  3. Re:How many ways can you by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Research been showing more problems than prevention from vaccines

    I'm going to use my annecdotal dataset of one. Let's see, people I know who've had vaccines. Hmm... all of them. Number of those people who have had negative side-effects.... none whatsoever. So, if there are more problems than prevention from vaccines, I'm not seeing it in my little slice of the world.

    In fact, given that vaccination rates run at something from 70-90% in industrialised countries and we aren't seeing 70-90% of people suffering more than they might expect from polio, measles, influenza, etc. I'd say that claiming that vaccines do more harm than good is complete bullshit.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  4. Anecdote by Kupfernigk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As someone who was nearly killed by measles and who could have died of the 76 flu had I note been treated, I suggest that you are writing nonsense. Mind you, the reference to replacing metal fillings with ceramic rather gives away where you're coming from.

    Yes a tiny number of people have died of vaccines. Have you any idea of how many would have died without them?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  5. Re:When will this be available? by swalve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are 7 billion people in the world, and thousands of new ones are being made every day. Every new person is a new customer. They would be plenty happy if they could capture just a percentage of that.

  6. Re:removing the right to fight for your life by SleazyRidr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Make sure you actually do the "keep away from people" bit. Then hopefully it'll just be you and your family dieing from preventable diseases and not the rest of us.

  7. Re:removing the right to fight for your life by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    vaccinating children against various disease - by giving their immune systems an "easy ride" - their immune systems simply do not develop

    That makes no sense. A vaccination only makes someone's immune system work harder, earlier. It is just like "playing in the dirt", only with particularly useful dirt.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park