Very interesting review of a paper published this week

[saintlyjimjams]

Malaria parasites evolve in vaccinated mice to cause more severe disease

Disclaimer: I am posting this because a) it's interesting b) it's well written and aimed at a lay audience with links to the original for those who wish to read that and c) if it's true that - for example - new strain pertussis is increasing disease severity then those who do not vaccinate need to know that.

The Read group produce some really interesting work, there's a link to a YouTube video as well in that article which looks interesting. Haven't watched it yet, but will do.

Please note I am not making any claims for this article nor advising people whether they should or should not vaccinate. (Anything I've missed?).

Yes, very interesting video, worth watching if you're interested in resistance:

I read it . Thank you for posting.

I am pleased this issue is now being talked about as it's something I have had some concerns about for years.

Well it's written by 'an award winning British science writer' so I think we're okay. It's a good review of the paper in questions as well. And it links to a TEDMED video, people who object to the crankosphere love TED. The video is well worth watching btw (I'll probably get told off for saying that) - it was like an updated version of the John Maynard Smith talk I mentioned somewhere this week.

It also passes the 'about humans' test - as I've been told off for linking to articles about vaccination in animals in the past.

Personally I'm interested in reading most things. But I think I followed the rules.....

bugger wrong thread - will have to double post

Ok, just watched the video. Very interesting, especially the last few minutes and his statement, "the evolutionary forces unleashed by medicine".
It makes you think, doesn't it?

Yes, very interesting.

I was pleased to show the efforts and research that goes on to prevent a vaccine being developed that is ineffective, or, worse, has undesirable consequences.

Three cheers for good research!

I'll be even happier when I see the JCVI have discussed it/considered it - or at least the questions it raises.

Actually this paper is getting quite a lot of coverage which is great as I'm not convinced it's something that is currently at the forefront of vaccine developers minds. It's always been quite hard to find information on these potential problems anyway.

This New Scientist article is a neat summary and it may be the last few lines that are key.

Clinical trials test whether vaccines protect people from disease, but don't look for impacts on the actual pathogens, apart from some that have tracked immune escape. Read says that in future such trials should also track which genes are active in malaria parasites in vaccinated people.

Chris Plowe at the University of Maryland in Baltimore, who works on AMA-1 vaccines, agrees. It could be difficult, however, as agencies that fund vaccine trials do not normally fund such tracking.

It's that sort of change that I would like to see. Obviously not just for malaria, but for any vaccination which is likely to lead to similar types of selection pressure. I was asked on another thread to explain why I was a sceptic. As I said there, I don't have issues with vaccination as such (although would like to see more done to identify those at higher risk before they're given a vaccination and would like choice in the program so you can for example get a tetanus jab whilst being able to refuse a pertussis one), but do have issues with the ways they're introduced, administered and followed. If they start doing the sort of thing mentioned above then tbh a lot of my concerns would be taken care of. I wouldn't necessarily choose to vaccinate ds2 and ds3 until we know more about their possible/probable/potential immune dysfunction, but I wouldn't have objections to the vaccination program.

I hope in the future trials will consider these sort of issues (and I hope the JCVI already does).

Not that what I think remotely matters. But, since I was asked a few days ago.....

Nice thread saintly. Worth bearing in mind they are identifying only certain types of vaccine which are susceptible of developing virulence - many common ones in the UK not being the case.

This is also part of the longstanding debate: what do you do if your DC is ill with something (worms/infection), you have the appropriate cure but there is a future risk that if you use it, it may become ineffective for others. Do you use it? My reply to this has changed since having children!

And it's already a problem with malaria and artemisinin resistance which is spreading. Anti malarials (both prophylactic and therapeutic) are leading to resistance.

Oh yes I realise that LeBFG - although perhaps relevant to the flu vaccination as they look to expand the programme? (There's obviously a good case for vaccination of at risk groups against the flu).