Vaccines trigger a protective immune response against infectious foreign pathogens that invade from outside the body, rather than targeting self antigens within.
I found this review to be important, clear and coherent. I'm a scientist, but not trained in immunology, virology or any of the health sciences. I found the underlining of terms (as opposed to footnote or reference numbers linked to footnotes, references or bibliographies) as a non-distracting way to cue the reader you've placed a source they can link to, immediately or later, for further information such as evidence-based research. Another area I'd like to highlight is your excellent use of metaphor or analogy to explain a scientific or statistical concept to readers who might not have the requisite knowledge. For example, you wrote: "Drawing conclusions from a single case report is statistically meaningless, as it represents an anecdotal observation rather than a meaningful data point from which any population-level inferences can be made - the equivalent of trying to characterize an ocean from a single drop of water." I learned a lot of foundational information about the human immune system from your piece. Thank you.
I used to work as a nurse on an acute neurology ward and then later in the emergency department. When on the neurology ward we had a patient with GBS that developed about 2 weeks after an acute gastrointestinal infection. Later in A&E a patient presented with unexplained bruising, on the off chance I asked if he’d had a gastrointestinal infection at all in the last couple of weeks, he said that he had. A blood test showed that he had thrombocytopenia, which could have been precipitated by the infection.
Such a great article! I like to add a simple illustration when I explain Misconception 10: "Case Reports as 'Proof'" to people… Correlation does not imply causation. For example, data show that as ice cream sales rise, so do cases of sunburn. However, these two trends are obviously not causally related. If you heard a story about a child who ate ice cream and later that day developed a severe sunburn, you wouldn’t assume the ice cream caused the sunburn. Instead, you’d recognize that both events are consequences of a common factor: spending more time in the sun. Often “case reports” conflate something that occurred around the same time with causation.
My husband is convinced his alopecia was caused by either the vaccine or the case of covid he had later on. He sent me this, one of several articles, as evidence. How does this work compared to all the information provided here? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9892995/
Thank you for your question and sharing the article and I am sorry to hear about your husbands condition. I am sure that has been challenging. From what I can find in the scientific literature, the spike protein made in response to the mRNA vaccines does not molecularly resemble (have the same structure) any of the proteins in the hair follicle. Molecular mimicry occurs when 2 things (such as proteins) have the same structure and composition and resemble each other to the point of being almost identical. As mentioned in this article, case reports do not provide a deep dive into the science behind the case. That is also true for this paper. While it reports 5 cases of AA, it does not identify the mechanism behind the onset of this condition. The only data shown is the table that displays the 'Severity of Alopecia Tool' which is based on appearance of the patient. Also mentioned in the brief report is that this condition could have been due to infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself or perhaps even the stress of lockdown. AA is known to occur in response to extreme stress. Again, I am sorry to hear this news and thank you for sharing it with us.
bit let's express it "clearly" so you've got one less pathetic excuses to avoid scientific facts.
cells expressing foreign protein s, such as mRNA spike.
are attacked by cd8 lymphocytes. That causes cellular destruction, damage and has harmed millions. killed millions. Auto immune attack by killer T lymphocytes. technically the mechanism of harm is the most important question on earth. if no immunologist will show up to disccuss that, it's because they are disgusting liars. simples.
It is a lie to say that the mRNA vaccines for COVID has killed millions. It may have killed a few people by anaphylaxis. So you're not an honest debater. The SARS CoV 2 virus has actually killed millions, and people continue to die from it even now five years on from the start of the pandemic. The risk from infection is much larger than the risk from the vaccine. Neither infection nor mRNA vaccination triggers long-lasting immunity because the spike proteins are presented too far apart to APCs in both cases. New virus-like particle vaccines might solve that problem by presenting multimers of spike protein held closer together.
FYI, T-cytotoxic cells also kill viral-infected cells in the course of an infection. This ideally prevents the virus from spreading, but in a severe infection can do a lot of damage and trigger inflammation sometimes killing the patient. Since viruses replicate in a host with logistic growth until the primary immune response brings them under control, the number of infected cells grows exponentially at first, so targets for Tc cells grow rapidly. In contrast vaccines that are not of the live attenuated virus type have a finite dose of antigen that is introduced to the body. The amount used is very small and gets destroyed quickly within a day or two. The mRNA vaccines also have a finite amount of mRNA that does not get replicated, and that gets destroyed after producing a finite amount of spike antigen. So mRNA translating cells stop producing spike protein far faster than they would in a SARS CoV 2 infection, and are less likely to be killed by Tcs.
I am a biologist, not an immunologist, but I did take microbiology and immunology courses, and have read up on vaccines and COVID from reliable sources. such as Science, Nature, Our World In Data, StatNews, etc.
ok so what's happening here is your an inexperienced biologist who is trying to explinto m, the world's leading scientist an T cell expert who has been reporting researching repeating , documenting on all aspects of COVID T cell immunolgy every day for 5 years with only two days off.
so what's happening is,your completely ignorant and yet your trying to teach basics to a wizard. who knows 10,000 times more than you essentially . so for example you can only barely manic to explain to me the basics of how CYTOTOXC T cells kill infected cells,cwetas I can explain to you exactly wichdocotes have said what about what and when an whowas right an where the evidene is an how it all works and why , you are being so stupid as to being a complelty inexperienced ignorant person thinking you can explain to me, the science T cell wizard, basics.
the reason is, everyone on the planet is being just as ignorant and then arrogant as you.
so everybody is putting on a show of knowing best. meanwhile you have to completely gaslight reality in order to do that.
which you did a lot of.
viraly infected cells present foreign epitopes on cell surface. get destroyed by T cells.
mrna does exactly the same thing. except all over people's organs and tissues.
your pathetic attempt to deny that was by saying the spike stops getting made so quickly,vthetecis no time for T cells to destroy.
that's totally and utter bullshit, an obviously so, and if it wasn't, the jabs wouldn't work anyway.
you either get an immune response, or you don't.
so please.
try again with more ignorant gaslighting.
I'm still waiting for the author to show up. coward.
I'm here waiting for a so called expert to simply discuss very important immunolgy. cd8+ T cells. if he can't show up and discuss, he's not a scientist, not an immunologist, he's a disgusting liar complicit on the cover up of mass genocide.
I found this review to be important, clear and coherent. I'm a scientist, but not trained in immunology, virology or any of the health sciences. I found the underlining of terms (as opposed to footnote or reference numbers linked to footnotes, references or bibliographies) as a non-distracting way to cue the reader you've placed a source they can link to, immediately or later, for further information such as evidence-based research. Another area I'd like to highlight is your excellent use of metaphor or analogy to explain a scientific or statistical concept to readers who might not have the requisite knowledge. For example, you wrote: "Drawing conclusions from a single case report is statistically meaningless, as it represents an anecdotal observation rather than a meaningful data point from which any population-level inferences can be made - the equivalent of trying to characterize an ocean from a single drop of water." I learned a lot of foundational information about the human immune system from your piece. Thank you.
I used to work as a nurse on an acute neurology ward and then later in the emergency department. When on the neurology ward we had a patient with GBS that developed about 2 weeks after an acute gastrointestinal infection. Later in A&E a patient presented with unexplained bruising, on the off chance I asked if he’d had a gastrointestinal infection at all in the last couple of weeks, he said that he had. A blood test showed that he had thrombocytopenia, which could have been precipitated by the infection.
Such a great article! I like to add a simple illustration when I explain Misconception 10: "Case Reports as 'Proof'" to people… Correlation does not imply causation. For example, data show that as ice cream sales rise, so do cases of sunburn. However, these two trends are obviously not causally related. If you heard a story about a child who ate ice cream and later that day developed a severe sunburn, you wouldn’t assume the ice cream caused the sunburn. Instead, you’d recognize that both events are consequences of a common factor: spending more time in the sun. Often “case reports” conflate something that occurred around the same time with causation.
Agree! Thank you for adding this important element to the conversation!
What an incredibly well researched and written review…thank you so much.
My husband is convinced his alopecia was caused by either the vaccine or the case of covid he had later on. He sent me this, one of several articles, as evidence. How does this work compared to all the information provided here? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9892995/
Thank you for your question and sharing the article and I am sorry to hear about your husbands condition. I am sure that has been challenging. From what I can find in the scientific literature, the spike protein made in response to the mRNA vaccines does not molecularly resemble (have the same structure) any of the proteins in the hair follicle. Molecular mimicry occurs when 2 things (such as proteins) have the same structure and composition and resemble each other to the point of being almost identical. As mentioned in this article, case reports do not provide a deep dive into the science behind the case. That is also true for this paper. While it reports 5 cases of AA, it does not identify the mechanism behind the onset of this condition. The only data shown is the table that displays the 'Severity of Alopecia Tool' which is based on appearance of the patient. Also mentioned in the brief report is that this condition could have been due to infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself or perhaps even the stress of lockdown. AA is known to occur in response to extreme stress. Again, I am sorry to hear this news and thank you for sharing it with us.
You're Dunning Krugering in a ridiculous fashion. No expert in immunology would waste their time on your poorly expressed hypothesis.
bit let's express it "clearly" so you've got one less pathetic excuses to avoid scientific facts.
cells expressing foreign protein s, such as mRNA spike.
are attacked by cd8 lymphocytes. That causes cellular destruction, damage and has harmed millions. killed millions. Auto immune attack by killer T lymphocytes. technically the mechanism of harm is the most important question on earth. if no immunologist will show up to disccuss that, it's because they are disgusting liars. simples.
It is a lie to say that the mRNA vaccines for COVID has killed millions. It may have killed a few people by anaphylaxis. So you're not an honest debater. The SARS CoV 2 virus has actually killed millions, and people continue to die from it even now five years on from the start of the pandemic. The risk from infection is much larger than the risk from the vaccine. Neither infection nor mRNA vaccination triggers long-lasting immunity because the spike proteins are presented too far apart to APCs in both cases. New virus-like particle vaccines might solve that problem by presenting multimers of spike protein held closer together.
FYI, T-cytotoxic cells also kill viral-infected cells in the course of an infection. This ideally prevents the virus from spreading, but in a severe infection can do a lot of damage and trigger inflammation sometimes killing the patient. Since viruses replicate in a host with logistic growth until the primary immune response brings them under control, the number of infected cells grows exponentially at first, so targets for Tc cells grow rapidly. In contrast vaccines that are not of the live attenuated virus type have a finite dose of antigen that is introduced to the body. The amount used is very small and gets destroyed quickly within a day or two. The mRNA vaccines also have a finite amount of mRNA that does not get replicated, and that gets destroyed after producing a finite amount of spike antigen. So mRNA translating cells stop producing spike protein far faster than they would in a SARS CoV 2 infection, and are less likely to be killed by Tcs.
I am a biologist, not an immunologist, but I did take microbiology and immunology courses, and have read up on vaccines and COVID from reliable sources. such as Science, Nature, Our World In Data, StatNews, etc.
ah, I should have edited and spell checked that.
never mind.
you can translate.
how pathetic is substack you can't edit comments.
ok so what's happening here is your an inexperienced biologist who is trying to explinto m, the world's leading scientist an T cell expert who has been reporting researching repeating , documenting on all aspects of COVID T cell immunolgy every day for 5 years with only two days off.
so what's happening is,your completely ignorant and yet your trying to teach basics to a wizard. who knows 10,000 times more than you essentially . so for example you can only barely manic to explain to me the basics of how CYTOTOXC T cells kill infected cells,cwetas I can explain to you exactly wichdocotes have said what about what and when an whowas right an where the evidene is an how it all works and why , you are being so stupid as to being a complelty inexperienced ignorant person thinking you can explain to me, the science T cell wizard, basics.
the reason is, everyone on the planet is being just as ignorant and then arrogant as you.
so everybody is putting on a show of knowing best. meanwhile you have to completely gaslight reality in order to do that.
which you did a lot of.
viraly infected cells present foreign epitopes on cell surface. get destroyed by T cells.
mrna does exactly the same thing. except all over people's organs and tissues.
your pathetic attempt to deny that was by saying the spike stops getting made so quickly,vthetecis no time for T cells to destroy.
that's totally and utter bullshit, an obviously so, and if it wasn't, the jabs wouldn't work anyway.
you either get an immune response, or you don't.
so please.
try again with more ignorant gaslighting.
I'm still waiting for the author to show up. coward.
I'm here waiting for a so called expert to simply discuss very important immunolgy. cd8+ T cells. if he can't show up and discuss, he's not a scientist, not an immunologist, he's a disgusting liar complicit on the cover up of mass genocide.