A solution to defeating evolving viruses

Redpatio

The more we attack a virus the more we strengthen it.

I think the solution to defeating persistent viruses could come from the idea of going in the opposite direction, for example engineer a species which allows the virus to thrive easily, and in doing so it weaken it.

Just an idea I had a few minutes ago that I wanted to get off my chest.

Annasopra

Like a vaccination?

Mr. CooL ICE

Arm everyone with flamethrowers.

endacl

I, for one, welcome our new viral overlords.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Engineer a species for every variant of every virus. That will end well.

Capt'n Midnight

Redpatio wrote: »

The more we attack a virus the more we strengthen it.

I think the solution to defeating persistent viruses could come from the idea of going in the opposite direction, for example engineer a species which allows the virus to thrive easily, and in doing so it weaken it.

Just an idea I had a few minutes ago that I wanted to get off my chest.

This is EXACTLY what the anti-vaxx crowd are doing today.



By the start of the 20th century we had introduced clean water and sewage systems, food was better quality and less seasonly dependent , real medicine and better hospitals, better housing and clothes. The chances of a child reaching adulthood were a lot higher than a century previously.

Result ?
500,000,000 people died of Smallpox.




So Plan-B was to attack it.

We won.

Victor

Global number of reported smallpox cases (1920-2010) https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-smallpox-cases

Redpatio wrote: »

The more we attack a virus the more we strengthen it.

There are two types of virus. Those that only live in people and those that can live elsewhere.

Those that only live in people - use vaccines and other infection prevention methods to make it extinct.

Those that can live elsewhere - use vaccines, other infection prevention methods and deprive it of host environments. The may mean ensuring the host environments have a weak form of the virus or some other virus that will deprive it of an environment.

Allowing a dangerous virus to thrive is not the way to go.

TheValeyard

How is this still a thing? How are people still against vaccinations???

Hector Bellend

**** the vitamins out of them

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

How is this still a thing? How are people still against vaccinations???

Read the anti-vaxx thread. There are some very deluded people out there, with some extremely strange and dangerous notions.

bazz26

Has I am Legend taught us nothing?

iamwhoiam

Strengthen the bodys immune system . Stop using sterile wipes on everything . Let toddlers get mucky and dirty . Stop using sterile wipes on toddlers equipment . Stop using anti bacterial hand wash , Soap and water is fine and let the kids immune systems get going

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Strengthen the bodys immune system . Stop using sterile wipes on everything . Let toddlers get mucky and dirty . Stop using sterile wipes on toddlers equipment . Stop using anti bacterial hand wash , Soap and water is fine and let the kids immune systems get going

While I agree with much of that, it's no solution. Smallpox, polio, cervical cancer etc, and mutations of viruses, all predate antiseptic hand wipes and antibacterial washes.

The Pheasant2

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Strengthen the bodys immune system . Stop using sterile wipes on everything . Let toddlers get mucky and dirty . Stop using sterile wipes on toddlers equipment . Stop using anti bacterial hand wash , Soap and water is fine and let the kids immune systems get going

What you're talking about is antibiotic resistance - corresponding to bacteria, nothing at all to do with viruses.

This common misunderstanding is actually a huge contributer to the progression of antibiotic resistance.

iamwhoiam

Hugo Deafening Banking wrote: »

While I agree with much of that, it's no solution. Smallpox, polio, cervical cancer etc, and mutations of viruses, all predate antiseptic hand wipes and antibacterial washes.

Yes i agree with that and not all viruses will be eradicated but kids now get far more viral illnesses than we did . We got colds etc but not these " unknown " viral illnesses in my opinion

iamwhoiam

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

What you're talking about is antibiotic resistance - corresponding to bacteria, nothing at all to do with viruses.

This common misunderstanding is actually a huge contributer to the progression of antibiotic resistance.

No I am not . I am talking about boosting a childs immune system to allow him fight off viruses . Kids now are over protected in my opinion
As kids we ate apples from the ground and water from streams and got mucky and dirty . We had baths once a week and washed with face cloths etc . We were not sick as much as kids are now

RustyNut

Haven't had a problem since upgrading to Windows 10 meself.

Redpatio

From what I understand, correct me if I'm wrong, there are forms of superviruses which are created which become resistant to treatments, as they continually evolve to combat the treatments.

Redpatio

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

What you're talking about is antibiotic resistance - corresponding to bacteria, nothing at all to do with viruses.

This common misunderstanding is actually a huge contributer to the progression of antibiotic resistance.

My mistake, I should have said bacteria instead of viruses in the OP.

Junkyard Tom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p25MA17bBQs

The Pheasant2

iamwhoiam wrote: »

No I am not . I am talking about boosting a childs immune system to allow him fight off viruses . Kids now are over protected in my opinion

With respect, yes you are.

All the things you refer to in your initial post (anti septic wipes, antibacterial soap etc.) are only effective in combating bacteria; they have literally no effect on viruses.

The B and T lymphocytes which fight infection in our bodies have receptors specific to whatever pathogen they combat individually. I.e. boosting the numbers of C.difficile bacteria specific lymphocytes by increasing the child's general level of exposure to dirt etc will have no effect whatsoever on the number of anti measles (or what have you) anti viral lymphocytes.

sullivlo

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

This is EXACTLY what the anti-vaxx crowd are doing today.



By the start of the 20th century we had introduced clean water and sewage systems, food was better quality and less seasonly dependent , real medicine and better hospitals, better housing and clothes. The chances of a child reaching adulthood were a lot higher than a century previously.

Result ?
500,000,000 people died of Smallpox.

So Plan-B was to attack it.

We won.

But what about autism? :rolleyes:

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

How is this still a thing? How are people still against vaccinations???

Because... chemtrails and fluoride :rolleyes:

Because people are assholes. That’s why.

Hugo Deafening Banking wrote: »

Read the anti-vaxx thread. There are some very deluded people out there, with some extremely strange and dangerous notions.

I thought I could not be shocked by antivax any more. This evening I was proved wrong

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Like a vaccination?

It’s not often that the first reply can be /thread but this was

iamwhoiam

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

With respect, yes you are.

All the things you refer to in your initial post (anti septic wipes, antibacterial soap etc.) are only effective in combating bacteria; they have literally no effect on viruses.

The B and T lymphocytes which fight infection in our bodies have receptors specific to whatever pathogen they combat individually. I.e. boosting the numbers of C.difficile specific lymphocytes by increasing the child's general level of exposure to dirt etc will have no effect whatsoever on the number of anti measles (or what have you) lymphocytes.

Yes thanks I understand that . I still maintain we need to stop keeping kids over clean and allow their immune systems strengthen . Forget all the fancy sprays and let them roll in muck

Redpatio

sullivlo wrote: »

But what about autism? :rolleyes:



Because... chemtrails and fluoride :rolleyes:

Because people are assholes. That’s why.



I thought I could not be shocked by antivax any more. This evening I was proved wrong



It’s not often that the first reply can be /thread but this was

A vaccination is a solution for a virus, not for the macro problem of evolving viruses.

The Pheasant2

Redpatio wrote: »

My mistake, I should have said bacteria instead of viruses in the OP.

Not necessarily, you are quite correct in saying viruses are constantly mutating/developing alternative mechanisms for evading our current treatments.

The difference comes in that the drugs used against viruses are generally quite distinct from those effective versus bacteria - owing mostly to the huge differences between bacterial/viral life cycle (in fact viruses aren't actually technically even "alive" at all!)

Resistance is a currently growing concern in both antibiotics and antivirals.

The Pheasant2

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Yes thanks I understand that . I still maintain we need to stop keeping kids over clean and allow their immune systems strengthen . Forget all the fancy sprays and let them roll in muck

Yeah and I agree with you in that regard.

I'm simply pointing out that what you're suggesting won't have any bearing on their ability to fend off specific viral infections; which is what we were discussing (at least before OP clarified what they intended to say).

Redpatio

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Not necessarily, you are quite correct in saying viruses are constantly mutating/developing alternative mechanisms for evading our current treatments.

The difference comes in that the drugs used against viruses are generally quite distinct from those effective versus bacteria - owing mostly to the huge differences between bacterial/viral life cycle (in fact viruses aren't actually technically even "alive" at all!)

Resistance is a currently growing concern in both antibiotics and antivirals.

Ok so perhaps a solution to the growing ineffectiveness of antibiotics and antivirals could come from idea of helping bacteria and viruses rather than attacking them. Turn the alley cat into a housecat, afraid of it's own shadow with taylor made hosts on a platter. The human immune system could then be too formidable to breach.

Capt'n Midnight

Redpatio wrote: »

A vaccination is a solution for a virus, not for the macro problem of evolving viruses.

It's very hard to evolve when you're extinct.

For viruses that only infect humans vaccination is the final solution.

sullivlo

Redpatio wrote: »

A vaccination is a solution for a virus, not for the macro problem of evolving viruses.

Yes. I am aware. Thank you.

However, research into vaccines that are produced can tell us a lot about how the viruses reproduce/mutate/evolve, what host cells are involved, and give us an idea of a strategy for developing new vaccines.

sullivlo

Nice graphic relating to antibiotics

Mountainsandh

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Yeah and I agree with you in that regard.

I'm simply pointing out that what you're suggesting won't have any bearing on their ability to fend off specific viral infections; which is what we were discussing (at least before OP clarified what they intended to say).

Is it not a case that a bacterial infection could lead to an environment more welcoming to a virus, and vice-versa ?

Say for example, you have a little bacterial infection that leads to weeping wounds. Wouldn't they be open doors for viruses then ?

The Pheasant2

Redpatio wrote: »

Ok so perhaps a solution to the growing ineffectiveness of antibiotics and antivirals could come from idea of helping bacteria and viruses rather than attacking them. Turn the alley cat into a housecat, afraid of it's own shadow with taylor made hosts on a platter. The human immune system could then be too formidable to breach.

Some of these pathogens have, over thousands upon thousands of years developed some of the most astonishingly specific mechanisms of infiltrating the body and causing infection. These dummy hosts you're suggesting would have to exhibit human cells if they're to be targeted by human viruses eg HIV...in which case the dummy hosts would actually constitute a reservoir for vital replication. Viruses are best thought of as tiny robots - they do not discriminate when it comes to infecting a host I.e. even if these dummy hosts could attract viral infection the viruses also would just infect us too.

The Pheasant2

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Is it not a case that a bacterial infection could lead to an environment more welcoming to a virus, and vice-versa ?

Say for example, you have a little bacterial infection that leads to weeping wounds. Wouldn't they be open doors for viruses then ?

Yes, but then again they'd be open doors for higher risk of infection by any pathogen bacterial or viral that uses such an entry mechanism.

Once inside however the body will still lack the necessary pathogen specific lymphocytes (assuming no prior exposure) for the production of the necessary antibodies and recognition by immune cells - this forms the basic rationale behind vaccination

Mountainsandh

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Yes, but then again they'd be open doors for higher risk of infection by any pathogen bacterial or viral that uses such an entry mechanism.

Once inside however the body will still lack the necessary pathogen specific lymphocytes (assuming no prior exposure) for the production of the necessary antibodies and recognition by immune cells - this forms the basic rationale behind vaccination

Absolutely, but as iamwhoiam was saying, were we to have stronger bacterial specific immune systems to fight infection A (bacterial), infection B (viral) would simply not be able to "come in".

In some instances.

So the child whose immune system has no bother healing that little childhood graze will have a better chance to NOT fall victim to an opportunistic virus.

Capt'n Midnight

Clostridium perfringens, the caustitive organism of gas gangrene has a generation time as little as 6.3 minutes. 232 generations every day.

One organism could have LOTS* of descendents. Enough to wipe out any theoretical advantage of breeding weaker relatives.


*6901746346790563787434755862277025452451108972170386555162524223799296, give or take, it's a lot

deco nate

Redpatio wrote: »

The more we attack a virus the more we strengthen it.

I think the solution to defeating persistent viruses could come from the idea of going in the opposite direction, for example engineer a species which allows the virus to thrive easily, and in doing so it weaken it.

Just an idea I had a few minutes ago that I wanted to get off my chest.

Tbh, best to kill off anyone with a virus. Just in case.
Sure the world is overpopulated as it is..

Stigura

Read This, only this evening.

All getting a bit out of whack, isn't it?

biko

Redpatio wrote: »

The more we attack a virus the more we strengthen it.

Your logic is flawed.