Is the immune system important in fighting coronavirus?

[pitabread]

What do you suggest?

That attempting to define a "healthy" immune system is not a strictly black-and-white issue.

There are times when a strong immune response is beneficial and there are times that it isn't. At lot of it is contextual.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That attempting to define a "healthy" immune system is not a strictly black-and-white issue.

There are times when a strong immune response is beneficial and there are times that it isn't. At lot of it is contextual.

So are you suggesting that we ignore our immune system, for those reasons? Didn't we just go through this with masks?

 

[pitabread]

So are you suggesting that we ignore our immune system, for those reasons? Didn't we just go through this with masks?

Again, not what I'm suggesting at all. I'm not sure how you are reading any of that into my posts.

I'm just suggesting that things are a bit more complicated in the world of biology than you seem to think they are.

For example, women have on average stronger immune systems than men. Women are also at higher risk for autoimmune diseases: Infections Reveal Inequality between the Sexes

Women might have evolved a particularly fast and strong immune response to protect developing fetuses and newborn babies, says Marcus Altfeld, an immunologist at the Heinrich Pette Institute in Hamburg, Germany. But it comes at a cost: the immune system can overreact and attack the body. This might explain why more women than men tend to develop autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis and lupus.​

Is that a good thing? Bad thing?

How does one even define that?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Again, not what I'm suggesting at all. I'm not sure how you are reading any of that into my posts.

I'm just suggesting that things are a bit more complicated in the world of biology than you seem to think they are.

I have been anticipating responses such as yours and others, as well as many experts, who downplay the value of a healthy immune system by emphasizing the negative aspects of it in regard to the coronavirus. Which reinforces the general opinion that personal health is not a big consideration in fighting the disease, and that 'the exception has become the rule'.

It is my (minority) opinion that we should be doing everything possible to improve our immune system by adopting the best health practices we can. I am appalled by the lack of attention paid to personal health by so many experts who have the public's attention at this time.

 

[pitabread]

I have been anticipating responses such as yours and others, as well as many experts, who downplay the value of a healthy immune system by emphasizing the negative aspects of it in regard to the coronavirus.

I never downplayed the value of a healthy immune system. Again, you're reading things into my posts that aren't there.

What I am saying is that the value of a healthy immune system is not a black-and-white issue. Do you understand what that means? Because I feel you're not actually reading my posts and instead are trying to start an argument based on reading into my posts.

It is my (minority) opinion that we should be doing everything possible to improve our immune system by adopting the best health practices we can.

I have never suggested otherwise. Certainly when it comes to general health and welfare, adopting healthy practices (healthy eating, exercise, etc) is certainly more preferable to not doing those things, as healthy people generally live longer and are more able-bodied.

However, one should not necessarily assume that a stronger immune system in-and-of-itself will unilaterally protect them from everything. Sometimes it can backfire.

In fact, in some cases it seems to be leading people to use that as an excuse to avoid social distancing by acting like their immune system will protect them from COVID-19. Which itself can create all sorts of other issues.

I am appalled by the lack of attention paid to personal health by so many experts who have the public's attention at this time.

I'm not sure where you are getting this idea from. Where I live, the messaging for better general health (e.g. healthy eating, quitting smoking, getting more exercise, etc) is one that is generally consistent regardless of the existence of the pandemic.

 

[jayem]

So a poorly functioning immune system would be best?

Of course not. But a truly healthy and well functioning immune system is a SMART immune system. It knows the difference between self and invader. And what’s vitally important is that it’s properly modulated. It must know when the enemy is defeated and it can return to peacetime readiness mode. As other posters mentioned, if immunity isn’t tuned just right, you get autoimmune diseases and cytokine storm. Which can be deadly.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Given the responses I've gotten here, and the general ignorance of the subject I'm satisfied that good immune health is just not considered that important in regard to the coronavirus.

 

[muichimotsu]

So it would be better if we got sick faster and more severely so we could save others from being infected by us?

No, it doesn't work that way, a virus spreads and is fought differently by each individual's immune system, we're not that interconnected, especially with quarantine and social distancing practices that will keep the spread to a minimum

And you can't get sick faster, far as I'm aware, or more severely, that's not a matter of choice, it's a matter of immune response, which isn't voluntary in nature

If you don't realize you're infected or infectious, then you trying to get sick faster or more severely is just going to exacerbate the spread in regards to those around you that you choose to interact with thinking that you're fine (but may not be)

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No, it doesn't work that way, a virus spreads and is fought differently by each individual's immune system, we're not that interconnected, especially with quarantine and social distancing practices that will keep the spread to a minimum

And you can't get sick faster, far as I'm aware, or more severely, that's not a matter of choice, it's a matter of immune response, which isn't voluntary in nature

If you don't realize you're infected or infectious, then you trying to get sick faster or more severely is just going to exacerbate the spread in regards to those around you that you choose to interact with thinking that you're fine (but may not be)

What I'm sarcastically saying is that it would be better if symptoms presented sooner rather than later so one wouldn't inadvertently infect many others. Of course this would require that one be in a poor state of immune health.

 

[muichimotsu]

What I'm sarcastically saying is that it would be better if symptoms presented sooner rather than later so one wouldn't inadvertently infect many others. Of course this would require that one be in a poor state of immune health.

No, that's not how viruses work universally, I'm pretty sure, since some can stick around much longer, while others are more short lived. Neither of us is an expert, but I feel like even in your sarcasm, you're insinuating knowledge claims about viruses and immunology that you can't really substantiate.

You could be in a poor immune state and you'd just die from complications before you had a chance to really spread it, not to mention we can generally tell that, versus asymptomatic people. It's like TB, which was the first disease I learned in regards to being asymptomatic, even though it does vary in that you can become symptomatic later, it's like remission of cancer as a rough parallel, I think.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No, that's not how viruses work universally, I'm pretty sure, since some can stick around much longer, while others are more short lived. Neither of us is an expert, but I feel like even in your sarcasm, you're insinuating knowledge claims about viruses and immunology that you can't really substantiate.

You could be in a poor immune state and you'd just die from complications before you had a chance to really spread it, not to mention we can generally tell that, versus asymptomatic people. It's like TB, which was the first disease I learned in regards to being asymptomatic, even though it does vary in that you can become symptomatic later, it's like remission of cancer as a rough parallel, I think.

When you factor in immune system health and viral load you can imagine all sorts of credible scenarios.

 

[muichimotsu]

When you factor in immune system health and viral load you can imagine all sorts of credible scenarios.

Not sure why mere credibility matters when we don't have the evidence to suggest that someone is just immune to this, like in Stephen King's The Stand. If that were the case, that person would be revolutionary to solving the problem, since we could develop a vaccine much easier from antibodies their body produces, but that's statistically almost impossible, even if we have nearly twice the population of the world from 1978 when the novel was written.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Not sure why mere credibility matters when we don't have the evidence to suggest that someone is just immune to this, like in Stephen King's The Stand. If that were the case, that person would be revolutionary to solving the problem, since we could develop a vaccine much easier from antibodies their body produces, but that's statistically almost impossible, even if we have nearly twice the population of the world from 1978 when the novel was written.

?

 

[pitabread]

Given the responses I've gotten here, and the general ignorance of the subject I'm satisfied that good immune health is just not considered that important in regard to the coronavirus.

If that's your takeaway, then you've managed to misconstrue everyone's responses. :/

 

[pitabread]

This article seems pertinent to this thread: How does coronavirus kill? Clinicians trace a ferocious rampage through the body, from brain to toes | Science | AAAS

Some clinicians suspect the driving force in many gravely ill patients’ downhill trajectories is a disastrous overreaction of the immune system known as a “cytokine storm,” which other viral infections are known to trigger. Cytokines are chemical signaling molecules that guide a healthy immune response; but in a cytokine storm, levels of certain cytokines soar far beyond what’s needed, and immune cells start to attack healthy tissues. Blood vessels leak, blood pressure drops, clots form, and catastrophic organ failure can ensue.

Some studies have shown elevated levels of these inflammation-inducing cytokines in the blood of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. “The real morbidity and mortality of this disease is probably driven by this out of proportion inflammatory response to the virus,” says Jamie Garfield, a pulmonologist who cares for COVID-19 patients at Temple University Hospital.

But others aren’t convinced. “There seems to have been a quick move to associate COVID-19 with these hyperinflammatory states. I haven’t really seen convincing data that that is the case,” says Joseph Levitt, a pulmonary critical care physician at the Stanford University School of Medicine.

He’s also worried that efforts to dampen a cytokine response could backfire. Several drugs targeting specific cytokines are in clinical trials in COVID-19 patients. But Levitt fears those drugs may suppress the immune response that the body needs to fight off the virus. “There’s a real risk that we allow more viral replication,” Levitt says.​

This article reinforces that trying to understand and treat a disease like COVID-19 is not a straight-forward affair.

 

[Radagast]

coronaviruses in general (which include the flu)

To be picky, coronaviruses and flu viruses are different. One group are negative-sense single-stranded RNA viruses, and the other positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses (I have forgotten which is which).

 

[Radagast]

Yes and no. A healthy immune system is generally a good defense against disease, but an overly aggressive immune response can be dangerous unto itself. If the immune system is too aggressive, the release of white blood cells can actually damage the body: https://www.vox.com/2020/3/12/21176...eaths-china-treatment-cytokine-storm-syndrome

During a cytokine storm, an excessive immune response ravages healthy lung tissue, leading to acute respiratory distress and multi-organ failure. Untreated, cytokine storm syndrome is usually fatal. Patients in other studies who developed cytokine storm syndrome after viral triggers often ironically possessed subtle genetic immune defects resulting in the uncontrolled immune response.
​

In another pandemic (Spanish flu) it was this sort of overly aggressive immune response which led to the deaths of primarily young adults compared to other demographics: Spanish flu - Wikipedia

That is correct. And, as far as I can tell, many deaths from COVID-19 are also the result of cytokine storms.

 

[Radagast]

That attempting to define a "healthy" immune system is not a strictly black-and-white issue.

Which kind of suggests that, on average, our immune systems are "tuned" about right. Sometimes we run into problems with an under-performing immune system, and sometimes we run into problems with an over-active one.

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[loveofourlord]

There is a few ways the immune system can be dangerous, the flu from a few years ago that was killing healthier people, what it was doing was it was being over zelous in it's attacking infected cells and such and it was killing off so many cells that you didn't have enough working cells in the lungs to breath or such.