Editing Talk:2406: Viral Vector Immunity
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Couldn't a similar comic be used to explain how immunity works in general? Instead of the horse being a vaccine vector, it would be a pathogen, and the immune cells recognize it from a previous encounter and attack it. Vaccine vector failure occurs when the vector resembles something you've developed immunity to. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC) | Couldn't a similar comic be used to explain how immunity works in general? Instead of the horse being a vaccine vector, it would be a pathogen, and the immune cells recognize it from a previous encounter and attack it. Vaccine vector failure occurs when the vector resembles something you've developed immunity to. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Yes, I agree with this — the current explanation for the comic (Trojan horse = immunity vector, Steve-trampling horse = common pathogen) doesn't explain how viral vector immunity works, it explains how it ''fails'' to work. I think a more appropriate explanation for the comic would have the Trojan horse be the pathogen against which immunity was desired, and the Steve-trampling horse be the DNA carried by the immunity vector. This would also be consistent with the traditional use of the Trojan horse to signify an unexpected threat (as opposed to the current interpretation's, whcih has the Trojan horse be beneficial). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.64|162.158.129.64]] 08:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC) | :Yes, I agree with this — the current explanation for the comic (Trojan horse = immunity vector, Steve-trampling horse = common pathogen) doesn't explain how viral vector immunity works, it explains how it ''fails'' to work. I think a more appropriate explanation for the comic would have the Trojan horse be the pathogen against which immunity was desired, and the Steve-trampling horse be the DNA carried by the immunity vector. This would also be consistent with the traditional use of the Trojan horse to signify an unexpected threat (as opposed to the current interpretation's, whcih has the Trojan horse be beneficial). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.64|162.158.129.64]] 08:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
:: I think you are misunderstood about the workings of a viral vector vaccine. The whole premise of this approach to vaccination is to use the ability of a virus to sneak into a human body undetected, later releasing its payload into the cells, but for a beneficial gain, rather than harm. The vector virus is perfectly represented by a trojan horse - it is supposed to enter the gates unrestricted. In the case of a real infection, the virus RNA injects itself into the cell and takes over its live processes, much like the soldiers took over the city after coming out of the Trojan horse. In the case of a vector vaccine, the trojan horse bears a beneficial payload inside. The trampling-horse is an incidental "immunity" to everything that looks like horses, i.e. immunity to the vector virus, not the payload virus (which they never get to experience since the horse never makes it in). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.215|162.158.158.215]] 02:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC) | :: I think you are misunderstood about the workings of a viral vector vaccine. The whole premise of this approach to vaccination is to use the ability of a virus to sneak into a human body undetected, later releasing its payload into the cells, but for a beneficial gain, rather than harm. The vector virus is perfectly represented by a trojan horse - it is supposed to enter the gates unrestricted. In the case of a real infection, the virus RNA injects itself into the cell and takes over its live processes, much like the soldiers took over the city after coming out of the Trojan horse. In the case of a vector vaccine, the trojan horse bears a beneficial payload inside. The trampling-horse is an incidental "immunity" to everything that looks like horses, i.e. immunity to the vector virus, not the payload virus (which they never get to experience since the horse never makes it in). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.215|162.158.158.215]] 02:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
I would disagree with the title text explanation, at least to a degree. The narrator is the person being recognised and threatened with the sword, but the narrator is not the vehicle of delivery of the modified payload (the coffee), that would still be the cup. I think either the metaphor or the explanation breaks at this point, which is not uncharacteristic of the title text often deviating from the stricter rules of the comic. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 21:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC) | I would disagree with the title text explanation, at least to a degree. The narrator is the person being recognised and threatened with the sword, but the narrator is not the vehicle of delivery of the modified payload (the coffee), that would still be the cup. I think either the metaphor or the explanation breaks at this point, which is not uncharacteristic of the title text often deviating from the stricter rules of the comic. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 21:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
Line 16: | Line 13: | ||
The narrator in the alt text/title text is the scientist/researcher performing the experiment. Except that the researcher doesn't usually get threatened with attack from the research subject. In some cases perhaps they should though, such as the Tuskegee experiments. | The narrator in the alt text/title text is the scientist/researcher performing the experiment. Except that the researcher doesn't usually get threatened with attack from the research subject. In some cases perhaps they should though, such as the Tuskegee experiments. | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |