Flu breakthrough promises a vaccine to kill all strains

[panzerfaust]

Source: Guardian (UK)

Scientists at Oxford University have successfully tested a universal flu vaccine that could work against all known strains of the illness, taking a significant step in the fight against a disease that affects billions of people each year.

The treatment – using a new technique and tested for the first time on humans infected with flu – targets a different part of the flu virus to traditional vaccines, meaning it does not need expensive reformulation every year to match the most prevalent virus that is circulating the world.

Developed by a team led by Dr Sarah Gilbert at Oxford's Jenner Institute, the vaccine targets proteins inside the flu virus that are common across all strains, instead of those that sit on the virus's external coat, which are liable to mutate...

The next step for the T-cell vaccine is to stage a field trial in comparing several thousand people are given and not given the vaccine. It will take several more years, therefore, before Gilbert's vaccine can be licensed for use alongside traditional, antibody-inducing vaccines...

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/feb/06/flu-universal-vaccine-test-success

---

Of course, one could argue about the claim "to kill all strains" as it remains a point of discussion as to if any virus is "alive" - which it would have to be in order to be killed.

But the point is that this new approach may very well prevent the replication of the influenza virus. Certainly would be a huge advance if it works out.

[ixion]

1. key phrase: "all known strains"

and what kind of a mutation will this cause? Something resistant to this no doubt.

[joshcryer]

4. Whatever mutations happen may not be considered flu at that point though.

[The Backlash Cometh]

47. By that time we will be calling it the Armageddon bug or the

Resident Evil strain,

[kestrel91316]

38. Vaccines don't cause mutations in the organisms they guard against. Oy vey.

[ixion]

51. Gee, well, no that is not correct...

organisms adjust to their environment in order to survive. A vaccine certainly fits into that landscape.

As evidence I offer the new strains of bacteria that are resistant or immune to standard treatments.

It is an organism, and it will evolve, I assure you.

[Odin2005]

73. A vaccine does not attack the pathogen, it gives you immunity to the pathogen.

[ixion]

74. It doesn't give you immunity... it stimulates a certain type of immune response that produces

the antibodies required to fight the virus. It makes you less susceptible, and perhaps better prepared, but not immune.

[panzerfaust]

2. Some background on this method

Here is a link to an earlier http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/1/1.full|paper> on T-Cell activation, and one to an
accompanying discussing this method.

Of the two, the editorial is more comprehensible and rewarding to read.

The clinical trial discussed in the Guardian article has yet to be published. "Early Days" as the UK expression has it: the trial was very small, but it does hold up hope for the future.

[indimuse]

3. no no no no no no no...

(shakes head)

[joshcryer]

5. Are you shaking your head because of the millions of lives this may save?

Or what?

[Ian David]

10. His mother was a flu virus. n/t

[blondeatlast]

21. You win the internets!

:rofl:

[Ian David]

30. Yes, I do...

[FourScore]

32. Hysterical! n/t

[Dappleganger]

25. Ha!

[Deep13]

15. What possible downside could there be? nt

[nxylas]

36. The gubmint could use it to implant tracking chips in all of us

Ahem, sorry about that. I used to live in South Carolina.

[kestrel91316]

39. Microchips are relatively huge. The needle used to implant them is even

huger. No way they sneak a chip in via a tiny needle like is used for flu vaccine injection. I know - I implant microchips into my patients with some regularity.

Oy.

[nxylas]

41. You're part of the conspiracy too!

Stop trying to confuse real Americans with all your fancy-schmancy college talk, with its facts and its logic. Jesus said that you can get a microchip into a flu vaccine. Y'all gonna argue with Jesus, commie?

[Deep13]

46. I ain't gittin no micro chips jected in me!

My Uncle Dad warned me bout that!

[denverbill]

49. Lost revenue for drugs companies selling flu relief products. n/t

[Deep13]

64. So...none.

People will still get head colds and various infections, so the OTC drug makes needn't close up shop just yet.

[xchrom]

6. that's awesome. bring it. nt

[4saken]

7. Wonderful to hear.

So many thousands of people still die from this monthly.

[Lars77]

8. I bet big pharma are having a heart attack right now lol

No surprise that this comes from a public institution (even with a good deal of private endowment).

[MA Mom]

11. My thought exactly! nt

[Deep13]

16. Won't "Big Pharma" be making the vaccine eventually? nt

[Lars77]

20. Sure, at the expense of all that cool flu medicine they've made

There's no money in making diseases extinct.

[Deep13]

22. They make flu vaccine now...

...and the flu antivirals seem seem to be a bit dodgy anyway as far as their commercial value goes. Flu isn't going to be extinct. Flu is essentially an avian intestinal disorder that spreads to humans, often from an intermediate source like swine. I suspect routine boosters and new vaccinations for new people will always be necessary. Seems like the main benefit from this new vaccine (if it works) is that there will be no more guess-work in the formulation--no more I got the flu despite being vaccinated because it was a different strain.

[Lars77]

24. I have no faith in big pharma

If it makes them more effective in combating the disease i'm sure they're against it. Makes the market shrink. :)

[kestrel91316]

40. Lol, there is no fear of making flu extinct. Far too many people refuse flu vaccines.

This vaccine WILL, if it performs ar hoped, make life much safer for those who wish to use it.

[Richard D]

44. Flu and colds

are different. People will still get colds.

Anyway, if one disease gets cured, big pharma will find another one to make billions from.

[Dokkie]

33. WHY?

Can you imagine the prices they would set for this one shot paid for by the treasury of all nations. As is its now, flu cost so little that am sure its not even worth their time to make it. But for one big shot, they could charge 100x the price of 1 regular flu shot and every child born would still need one. So please don't shed any tears for big pharma.

[Ian David]

9. Thank you, Dr. Sarah Gilbert!

[MilesColtrane]

12. Isn't this how all those zombie apocalypse movies start?

[Can of Whoop-ass]

13. Reagan's jellybeans

were the "Body Snatchers"!

[Deep13]

17. Yup. Good thing zombies are impossible. nt

[LanternWaste]

27. As is the perception

" Good thing zombies are impossible...."
As is the perception of an obvious humor in many instances....

[Deep13]

29. Not to worry. I have extra-sensory humor perception. nt

[Phoonzang]

35. Undead zombies are impossible, but Virus zombies are possible. *nods* nt

[MilesColtrane]

58. You must be unfamiliar with our former Vice President.

Dick Cheney Has No Pulse!

[Deep13]

65. Damn! It only takes one positive result to disprove impossibility!

Are you sure he's a zombie? I always thought of him as more of a Frankenstein monster.

[MilesColtrane]

70. There's also a strong argument for evil cyborg.

[Safetykitten]

48. That or a planet of 300 year old kids...

[greiner3]

14. "as to if any virus is "alive""

Several years ago some of my professors said the most likely 3 'common' ideas that were to be overturned would be;

Pluto was a planet;

Chimpanzees were to be part of the genus Homo vs. Pan;

Viruses were not alive.

The first has since come to fruition. Scientists are going about the second and the third needs more common understanding.

[FailureToCommunicate]

18. Good news if successful...

Evil little monsters:

[FailureToCommunicate]

23. Let's keep some viruses around in case THESE guys show up...

again.

[FourScore]

34. THat's so funny -- I thought about the same thing! n/t

[kestrel91316]

42. That fancy graphic at the top depicts a BACTERIOPHAGE

(that's a virus that attacks bacteria) and not a flu virus.

Bacteriophages are our friends.

[FailureToCommunicate]

54. Oh, I know. (It's actually a "T-4" virus) I included it 'cause they look

and act so creepy - like the War of the Worlds aliens.

They are not always our friends, though: the cheese, chemical, and bio-tech industries is always vigilant against them.

Neat video of how they replicate here:

http://wn.com/T4_phage

[Javaman]

19. It will "kill all strains" until the next mutation. LOL

I think the predicted death of the flu virus is grossed exaggerated. ;) LOL

[Bluenorthwest]

28. this contains no prediction of the death of the flu virus

It offers a better protection from infection by such a virus, and if you think about it, one does not need protection or from that which is extinct. Flu is not a 'humans only' virus, so it could have a full life without us being involved.

[Javaman]

31. Then perhaps a change in the headline is in order...

Nature always confounds. And if I were a betting man, which I am not, I would bet on nature rather than people who believe they can beat it.

[jeff47]

53. Yeah, look at all those new strains of smallpox that arose from that vaccine (nt)

[Javaman]

61. And bravo to the WHO for eradicating it.

I'm no fool.

However, there was only one type of small pox. There are literally hundreds of types of the virus for the flu.

Small pox did not continually evolve. Influenza does. Read up on how the actual eradication of small pox took place. It was incredibly difficult.

Two great books, if you are interested in reading are, "The Flu" and "The Great Influenza Epidemic". It will give you an idea of what the people who are valiantly trying to "kill all flu" are up against.

The universe has been around a lot longer than humans. I'm not so egotistical to believe that we are able to conquer nature.

When nature gets tired of us, it will let us know.

[jeff47]

76. Actually, I don't need to read up on it

'Cause I'm a former microbiologist. I'm well aware of how viruses work.

The deal here is that only one part of the virus can change, it's outer protein coat. But to infect a cell, viruses have to bind to a protein on the surface of the cell. If a mutation alters the binding site in the virus, then it can no longer bond to the cell and can't infect a cell.

I haven't seen the actual paper backing up this vaccine, but the popular press coverage indicates that the new vaccine targets this part of the flu virus: the part that can't mutate or the virus won't work anymore.

So no, the flu won't just mutate out of it. The only way to mutate out of this vaccine would be for humans/birds/pigs to also mutate. And the mutation rate in those species is very, very low.

[Javaman]

81. Well that's a different approach.

Hope it works.

Well, we'll wait and see.

[MilesColtrane]

26. The super drug resistant bacteria are happy about this.

Less competition for human meat!

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/09/16/drug-resistant-bacteria-superbugs-food-supply/

[kestrel91316]

37. LOL, I hate when journalists with zero medical background write about

medicine. Vaccines do not "kill" viruses. They stimulate immune system protection against said viruses.

Besides, the argument can be made that viruses are not technically alive in the first place. They are more like parasitic assemblages of molecules.

A new vaccine that would protect against all flu strains sounds tempting. If there are no novel safety issues with it, I'm game. I take a big financial hit every time I get the flu.

[defendandprotect]

43. We're creating new viruses -- super viruses ... wonder why?

[Deep13]

45. Like what?

I'm aware of drug-resistent bacteria, but have never heard of "super" viruses.

[defendandprotect]

50. Probably some info on the super viruses on internet --

or hit the library -- many books written on that subject in last decades --

Viruses mutate -- continue to advance in ways to attack a cell --

when you get rid of one level, you force an advance to another level.

[jeff47]

56. You appear to be confusing antibiotics with vaccines

Misuse of antibiotics can lead to "super bugs", or particularly dangerous bacteria.

But vaccines do not work the same way. The vaccine doesn't kill the virus, our immune system does. Vaccines are a training tool for our immune systems.

Nor can a virus develop a "new" way to attack a cell - viruses must use the proteins on the surface of our cells to infect the cell. The only way to develop a new way is for both the virus AND our cells to change. As far as we know, the surface of our cells hasn't changed since our species developed.

[msanthrope]

60. Don't bring science into this. n/t

[defendandprotect]

83. No -- and the fact that people have to re-vaccinated for the flu every year is one example ...

of that --

Vaccinations are not natural immunity --

Some viruses solve the host numbers problem by overcoming the animal's immune memory by changing or mutating into a slightly different virus that can infect the same host over and over. If a virus has a high mutation rate it can overcome our immune memory by changing its' surface proteins (Ag's) so the antibodies that are produced no longer attach. The RNA viruses are good at this. HIV that causes AIDS mutates so fast that the immune system never clears it from the body and every vaccine that has been developed has failed to prevent infection from this ever-mutating virus. After time the vaccines fail because the virus changes its' surface proteins where any antibodies produced no longer recognize the virus. It is like a "new" virus. With HIV this unfortunately results in a life-shortening infection. The RNA retroviuses like HIV have the highest mutation rates ever measured.

and ...

The RNA viruses that do not go into latency (not retroviruses) have lower mutation rates (but higher than DNA viruses). A good example is the influenza virus. Every year there is a flu season in the Fall and Winter months. The influenza virus has two main surface proteins that allow the virus to infect. These are the "H" and "N" proteins. When we are infected (or vaccinated) with flu we develop memory antibodies against the "H" & "N" proteins. Thus, they are sometimes called the "H" & "N" antigens (Ag's). The antibodies produced will prevent subsequent infection if we are exposed to the same flu virus. However, as the flu virus travels around the world following the local flu season, it mutates. If the RNA that codes for either the "H" or "N" Ag mutates then the protein will be slightly different and those antibodies will no longer bind. Now, the chances of having both the "H" and "N" antigens mutate in a given year is really small. So, chances are that only one of them will change. When this happens and we are exposed to this mutated virus during next years flu season some of our antibodies will bind and some will not. Those that bind to the non-mutated protein will still give us some protection. Those antibodies against the mutated protein will no longer work. So, the infection will be mild but infect a lot of people. This process of gradual mutation from year to year is called antigenic drift and leads to yearly epidemics of flu. Every year the CDC determines how the flu virus has mutated and makes a new vaccine based on these new strains.

So, every year we get a new flu shot.

http://www.college.ucla.edu/webproject/micro12/m12webnotes/viralevolution.htm

[Deep13]

63. I know they mutate.

Vaccination doesn't "force" it to do anything. That's not how natural selection works. Smallpox did not turn into super smallpox. Polio did not become super polio. The same for all the childhood killers that have been minimized by vaccination. Calling it a super virus implies that it is qualitatively different that other viruses. There are always new flu strains. Flu is insidious in its ability to mutate. What makes this research interesting is that it targets what all flu viruses have in common. It may mutate away from that commonality. Whatever it becomes at that point won't be flu.

[defendandprotect]

84. HIV virus vaccine has failed because it MUTATES so quickly ....

Vaccines are not natural immunity --

And, as all of our other drugs are subject to the capitalistic ventures and greed

that we see so are our vaccines.

Nothing is proven harmless or benign or wholly successful except over a long period

of time -- 7th generation.

[ixion]

52. AIDS for one

there are others.

[jeff47]

55. AIDS is from a run-of-the-mill virus.

There is nothing particularly "super" about HIV. What is unique is that the virus infects cells from the immune system.

Vaccines are not antibiotics, and work in a completely different way. The concerns over improper antibiotic use do not apply to vaccines.

[ixion]

57. well, actually, it mutates

which is what has made it so difficult to deal with.

And while it might be from a run-of-the-mill virus (like influenza strains) it has mutated into something quite super.

[jeff47]

77. Lots of viruses mutate

So that's not really special.

The unique feature of HIV is that it infects immune system cells. Other viruses don't. That doesn't make it particularly super, just makes it more effective at remaining in the host.

[Deep13]

62. AIDS was around in 1985. Not really "new" ...

and certainly not caused by vaccine research. About the only thing HIV and flu have in common is that they are both retroviruses.

[ixion]

66. It is a virus that mutates

and that is the point: Viruses are NOT static. They are subject to the Law of Evolution, like any other organism.

[Deep13]

67. That much is true. nt

[AngryAmish]

68. Except influenza is not a retrovirus

Influenza does not become part of the dna of the host.

I am quickly running into he limits of my knowledge in the subject but most viruses take over the rna replication of a cell, make it make lots of viruses. Retrovirus become part of the dna of the host cell.

I think. This is damn complex stuff.

[Deep13]

69. Oh. I thought it was.

I'll look it up later to figure out why I thought that.

[jeff47]

82. Almost

The Influenza family of viruses are RNA viruses, but do not convert themselves to DNA. They just replicate their RNA. This process is often error-prone, since the virus doesn't have space for "proofreading" enzymes and host "proofreading" enzymes only operate on DNA. That's what makes the flu virus mutate rapidly.

Retroviruses are a category of RNA viruses. They contain RNA that is turned into DNA inside the host. But integration with the host genome doesn't matter. Most hosts we care about, such as people, already have multiple pieces of DNA in their cells. So an "extra" piece from the virus will still get transcribed into new viruses.

The benefit to the virus of converting to DNA is they hijack the high-fidelity enzymes of the host to make accurate copies. The mutation rate on such viruses basically comes down to the error rate of the virus's RNA->DNA enzyme.

[Odin2005]

71. You are confusing viruses and vaccines with bacteria and antibiotics.

Vaccines do not create resistant pathogens.

[defendandprotect]

85. What's the HIV/AIDS virus?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4724038&mesg_id=4725136

[closeupready]

59. This is a thread in search of a Jenny McCarthy post, so

here it is. :rofl:

[Odin2005]

72. Excellent news!

[FLPanhandle]

75. We can be ingenious little apes when we put our minds to it.

Very cool.

[DeadEyeDyck]

78. ...to kill us all...

[mahina]

79. It damn near killed me this year

I'm delighted to hear it.

[GeorgeGist]

80. Point of order.

Vaccines do not kill viruses.

Vaccines activate the immune system to kill the virus.