The immune system: It's all about the context
By Dr. Michal Haran
The immune system is a very complicated biological network of cells and proteins that has learning and training abilities, as well as a good memory. A particularly interesting operation that this network is trained to do is adjusting its response to the context.
Let me explain. If we see a bonfire in a camping ground, quite likely we are not going to call 911, but if we see a fire in the middle of our living room, quite likely we will. But what if we then realize that the fire is confined to the fireplace?
Our response will not be based only on the existence of the fire itself, but also on the context.
The same applies to our immune system.
When something happens to us out of context, we may become confused. Our immune system may respond in a similar manner.
For example, what happens when a normal cell in our body starts to produce a viral protein “out of context?” What would be the response of the immune system? Can it become confused and attack that cell?
Indeed, at the beginning of the COVID vaccination campaign, I raised the concern that the vaccine’s mode of action, which involves transfection of cells with an mRNA encoding a viral protein, could cause autoimmune diseases, basing this concern on the medical literature and on current knowledge of the immune system. There is growing evidence that this indeed might be one of the consequences of the mRNA vaccine, with numerous case reports and case series, such as these (1-4).
I admit that I did not consider at the time the other side of the same coin. If the viral spike protein is presented in the same context as self-proteins, could there be some risk that the immune system will eventually recognize it as a self-protein and develop tolerance towards it, so that future response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus will be suppressed?
Two recently published studies raise concerns to this effect.
In one study (5), not yet peer reviewed, the researchers discovered to their surprise that vaccinated subjects were infected at a higher rate than the unvaccinated ones, but were not able to provide an explanation for this unexpected observation.
A second, published study (6) examined the immune response to the vaccine in more depth than what is usually done. They did not only check for the development of antibodies that are able to bind well to the spike protein. They checked for subclasses of antibodies. Their results suggest that a continuous exposure of the immune system to the spike protein produced by the body's own cells causes the immune system to treat it more and more as a self-protein. Furthermore, they found that the booster vaccine increases this process.
A large fraction of the high affinity antibodies (those that bind well to the spike) that are seen after the booster, belong to the IgG4 subclass. Let me explain the possible importance of this findings: antibodies (immunoglobulins) are divided into classes and subclasses. IgG4 antibodies (as opposed to IgG1 and IgG3) have a dampening effect on the immune system (quite similar to what happens when desensitization to a specific allergen occurs). This is concerning because it could mean that the repeated exposure to the spike protein in the context of a “self” protein can eventually lead to development of tolerance towards the spike protein and a much less robust and effective immune response. Theoretically, there could also be additional problems as a result of the binding of IgG4 antibodies to a protein that is expressed on the cell surface, as they may also affect intracellular processes. But this is more speculative.
Therefore, as I pointed out since the beginning of the vaccine rollout, turning cells of the body into hybrids that produce a viral foreign protein and express it as if it were its own protein may lead to undesirable results.
History shows that humans are very good at producing advanced technologies to solve problems, but their ability to predict the long-term consequences of these technologies is very limited.
In the past, at least there was a careful attempt to monitor these results and stop before further damage happened. In particular, there was a very strict regulatory process for novel technologies.
But, as time passed, human hubris and possibly other factors caused those precautions to gradually become much less strict.
Moreover, it is increasingly more difficult to isolate the impact of a particular technology from the thousands of other technologies that came into use at the same time.
It is quite clear that there has been a gradual increase in the incidence of diseases that were previously extremely rare. But how can we delineate the cause for this phenomenon?.
Is it the cleaning agents we use, the industrialized food, the non-ionizing radiation, our vaccines?
Perhaps what happened over the past 3 years during the COVID pandemic should lead us to stop and ask ourselves some questions, instead of rushing on to find “fast and easy” solutions for the next crisis.
Dr. Michal Haran is A senior hematologist with special interests in: Thrombosis and hemostasis; Malignant and non-malignant abnormalities of the immune system with emphasis on CLL; Mitochondrial dysfunction in hematological malignancies; Environmental exposure and nutritional interventions in both hematological and neurological disorders.
Reference:
1. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/imm.13443
2. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/10/7/1135
3. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2497835
"repeated exposure to the spike protein" - not only are they repeatedly injecting people, they even included the Wuhan strain in the bivalent shot to ensure the exact same strain is repeatedly produced the in body..
Yeah, I can see that both ways now too; autoimmunity and tolerance, kind of like two sides of the same coin.