7 ms·

The year you were born predicts flu risk

111 points by sciadvance 10y ago

Zenst 10y ago
I'm wondering if this is also a factor in transplants and one area of complications that could be identified prior to transplant. A differing immune system and white blood cells would explain many failed transplants and also this might be one instance in which the immune systems of like blood types differ and effect outcomes. May be more case of not only matching blood type but also immune system compatibility, with this being once example of how they differ.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  The understanding of compatibility is already factoring in a great deal more than blood type, it's just that there is so much variation that donors rarely match recipients. See the HLA Typing part of this: http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/transplant/livingdonation/donor_compatible.html http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/transplant/livingdonation/donor...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
SamBam 10y ago
If it turns out that the very first fly virus you're exposed to has such a large effect on the immune system, it sounds like this could be great news for developing a better fly vaccine to give as a baby's first shot.
- kodt 10y ago
  That fly virus can be nasty, just ask Jeff Goldblum.
  - SamBam 10y ago
    I have no idea how I typed that twice in a row...
8ig8 10y ago
Was hoping I could enter my birth year and get back some risk prediction.
- Senji 10y ago
  If the data is open, kickstart a webpage or heroku or githubio with js.
  - sushid 10y ago
    Not sure if it'd be that simple. The authors discuss only a few specific countries and admit that although the differences in the risk is "remarkably small, some noise arises from generalization across time and countries" [0]. And if you factor in that they were studying mostly Asian countries, Egypt, and Germany, there might be even more discrepancies to account for. [0] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6313/722.full http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6313/722.full
alley-justine 10y ago
Ridiculous, scientists want to be the new oracles that they fought for centuries. Science is turning into a religion with the almighty priests who receives the truth from their eminent laboratories. Stop churning out papers to prove you exist and you are an expert. Your only use is to justify extortionate vaccine prices that are in fact harmful and deadly. Robot monkey scientists...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- RobertoG 10y ago
  I can't tell if you are being sarcastic but wanted to say something. Science it's very different of an oracle. Oracles are about vagueness, good science it's the opposite. The proposal of new theories it's always a good thing, because other strength of science is that never anything is definitive. The shock that I have not yet recovered it's epigenetics. After dismissing Lamarckism as ridiculous for so long, it seems that there is some truth there. We should be a little more humble and don't dismiss nothing as 'ridiculous'. 'Improbable' take exactly the same space in the text and it's a more wise attitude.
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  Mhm... Only, science generally doesn't claim to have all the answers or be right all the time. It is all part of moving forward. Sometimes there are differences between scientists, but that's to be expected as we are still learning stuff. Science doesn't know everything and that's ok. Not only that, but vaccines aren't extortionate in their prices - they only count for a portion of the profits drug companies make. Most places in the US have somewhere to get the vaccines at a decently low cost - but even out of pocket they aren't too expensive and part of the cost is the nurse or pharmacist (and so on) that is administering the shot to you. Religion, most times, deals with morals. Many of them are extremely interested in when you have sex, for example. And often, the god-form is seen as all-knowing and infallible.
- edblarney 10y ago
  This is a terribly misplaced comment. This is reasonable science, backed up with a strong thread of logic. Save your woes for 'social sciences'. :)
sna1l 10y ago
I feel like while this does open up a lot of new interesting questions, it could also just be happenstance. It seems like there would be so many potential factors that could be causing a distribution like this. But I'm not a scientist, so dunno.
JoelBennett 10y ago
It's almost too bad there isn't some way of manufacturing all 18 varieties of hemagglutinin, and wrapping them all into a single vaccine.
- rsync 10y ago
  Do we want to not get the flu ? I really hate getting the flu ... I hate feeling terrible for 12-24 hours, I hate missing multiple workouts ... hate hate hate. However, in recent years I've stopped my (seemingly ineffective) efforts to avoid the flu at all costs and further have started to appreciate the positive effects that getting the flu every 12-18 months might have. In an otherwise healthy adult, what puts your immune system through it's paces - what gives your immune system a workout - like having the flu ? What happens to my immune system if I don't give it that thorough workout every year for ... say ... 40 years ? What kind of immune system do I end up with at the other end of avoiding the flu for a large chunk of my life ? Related to that, what else gets killed every 12 months when my temperature goes up to 102 or 104 for half a day ?
  - dqv 10y ago
    I'd generally like to avoid anything that changes my DNA (read: increases my risk of cancer). Cancer will really give your immune system a work out.
  - derefr 10y ago
    There was that strain of flu, a year or two ago, that was killing "otherwise healthy adults." I'd rather not have that one.
  - jedberg 10y ago
    Getting your flu shot should give your immune system plenty workout. It's like sparring at 1/2 power with full pads vs. getting into a full on street fight. Sure, the street fight will give you a slightly more real practice session, but at what cost? There is a lot of collateral damage there.
    - 10y ago
oska 10y ago
From a bird flu perspective, 1970 doesn't look like a good year to be born. Has relatively high contraction rate for both H7N9 and H5N1.
tominous 10y ago
> [In 1968] a pandemic of H3N2 influenza, known as the Hong Kong flu, completely replaced the H2N2 and H1N1 seasonal influenza strains that circulated earlier. I'm curious about the idea of flu viruses completely replacing each other. Do they interact or compete for resources in some way? Could we design a very mild flu which would replace other variants?
- akiselev 10y ago
  It's less like they're competing for resources and more like they're competing to see which one will survive the longest against the immune system. The human body is a nearly infinite source of food for pathogens but antibodies aren't always very precise in the strain they target. False positives are largely harmless so the B-cells that produce antibodies are even less discriminating. When you have similar strains of a bacteria or virus, they can all cause the same immune reaction (which is how vaccines work) but tiny genetic variations in each strain can also drastically change how effective the reaction is against variant. Since bacteria/viruses reproduce very vast and the immune system is very good at its job, you essentially get an accelerated arms race that heavily favors the survival of the fittest. Even one part per million difference in probabilities is almost enough to guarantee the dominance of a single strain.
  - tominous 10y ago
    That explains tiny variations, but the article is talking about a shift to a new variant which requires a different immune response. The question is why did this new variant "completely replace" the old ones in the population, instead of just operating in parallel? The only thing I can think of is that the old flu variants were in decline already due to herd immunity, but the article seemed to imply there was more to it than that.
eatbitseveryday 10y ago
I'm a little confused. The figures show number of cases. Higher number of cases = greater risk?

111 points by sciadvance 10y ago

Zenst 10y ago

I'm wondering if this is also a factor in transplants and one area of complications that could be identified prior to transplant. A differing immune system and white blood cells would explain many failed transplants and also this might be one instance in which the immune systems of like blood types differ and effect outcomes. May be more case of not only matching blood type but also immune system compatibility, with this being once example of how they differ.

maxerickson 10y ago
The understanding of compatibility is already factoring in a great deal more than blood type, it's just that there is so much variation that donors rarely match recipients. See the HLA Typing part of this: http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/transplant/livingdonation/donor_compatible.html http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/transplant/livingdonation/donor...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

SamBam 10y ago

If it turns out that the very first fly virus you're exposed to has such a large effect on the immune system, it sounds like this could be great news for developing a better fly vaccine to give as a baby's first shot.

kodt 10y ago
That fly virus can be nasty, just ask Jeff Goldblum.
- SamBam 10y ago
  I have no idea how I typed that twice in a row...

8ig8 10y ago

Was hoping I could enter my birth year and get back some risk prediction.

Senji 10y ago
If the data is open, kickstart a webpage or heroku or githubio with js.
- sushid 10y ago
  Not sure if it'd be that simple. The authors discuss only a few specific countries and admit that although the differences in the risk is "remarkably small, some noise arises from generalization across time and countries" [0]. And if you factor in that they were studying mostly Asian countries, Egypt, and Germany, there might be even more discrepancies to account for. [0] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6313/722.full http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6313/722.full

alley-justine 10y ago

Ridiculous, scientists want to be the new oracles that they fought for centuries. Science is turning into a religion with the almighty priests who receives the truth from their eminent laboratories. Stop churning out papers to prove you exist and you are an expert. Your only use is to justify extortionate vaccine prices that are in fact harmful and deadly. Robot monkey scientists...

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
RobertoG 10y ago
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic but wanted to say something. Science it's very different of an oracle. Oracles are about vagueness, good science it's the opposite. The proposal of new theories it's always a good thing, because other strength of science is that never anything is definitive. The shock that I have not yet recovered it's epigenetics. After dismissing Lamarckism as ridiculous for so long, it seems that there is some truth there. We should be a little more humble and don't dismiss nothing as 'ridiculous'. 'Improbable' take exactly the same space in the text and it's a more wise attitude.
Broken_Hippo 10y ago
Mhm... Only, science generally doesn't claim to have all the answers or be right all the time. It is all part of moving forward. Sometimes there are differences between scientists, but that's to be expected as we are still learning stuff. Science doesn't know everything and that's ok. Not only that, but vaccines aren't extortionate in their prices - they only count for a portion of the profits drug companies make. Most places in the US have somewhere to get the vaccines at a decently low cost - but even out of pocket they aren't too expensive and part of the cost is the nurse or pharmacist (and so on) that is administering the shot to you. Religion, most times, deals with morals. Many of them are extremely interested in when you have sex, for example. And often, the god-form is seen as all-knowing and infallible.
edblarney 10y ago
This is a terribly misplaced comment. This is reasonable science, backed up with a strong thread of logic. Save your woes for 'social sciences'. :)

sna1l 10y ago

I feel like while this does open up a lot of new interesting questions, it could also just be happenstance. It seems like there would be so many potential factors that could be causing a distribution like this. But I'm not a scientist, so dunno.

JoelBennett 10y ago

It's almost too bad there isn't some way of manufacturing all 18 varieties of hemagglutinin, and wrapping them all into a single vaccine.

rsync 10y ago
Do we want to not get the flu ? I really hate getting the flu ... I hate feeling terrible for 12-24 hours, I hate missing multiple workouts ... hate hate hate. However, in recent years I've stopped my (seemingly ineffective) efforts to avoid the flu at all costs and further have started to appreciate the positive effects that getting the flu every 12-18 months might have. In an otherwise healthy adult, what puts your immune system through it's paces - what gives your immune system a workout - like having the flu ? What happens to my immune system if I don't give it that thorough workout every year for ... say ... 40 years ? What kind of immune system do I end up with at the other end of avoiding the flu for a large chunk of my life ? Related to that, what else gets killed every 12 months when my temperature goes up to 102 or 104 for half a day ?
- dqv 10y ago
  I'd generally like to avoid anything that changes my DNA (read: increases my risk of cancer). Cancer will really give your immune system a work out.
- derefr 10y ago
  There was that strain of flu, a year or two ago, that was killing "otherwise healthy adults." I'd rather not have that one.
- jedberg 10y ago
  Getting your flu shot should give your immune system plenty workout. It's like sparring at 1/2 power with full pads vs. getting into a full on street fight. Sure, the street fight will give you a slightly more real practice session, but at what cost? There is a lot of collateral damage there.
  - 10y ago

oska 10y ago

From a bird flu perspective, 1970 doesn't look like a good year to be born. Has relatively high contraction rate for both H7N9 and H5N1.

tominous 10y ago

> [In 1968] a pandemic of H3N2 influenza, known as the Hong Kong flu, completely replaced the H2N2 and H1N1 seasonal influenza strains that circulated earlier. I'm curious about the idea of flu viruses completely replacing each other. Do they interact or compete for resources in some way? Could we design a very mild flu which would replace other variants?

akiselev 10y ago
It's less like they're competing for resources and more like they're competing to see which one will survive the longest against the immune system. The human body is a nearly infinite source of food for pathogens but antibodies aren't always very precise in the strain they target. False positives are largely harmless so the B-cells that produce antibodies are even less discriminating. When you have similar strains of a bacteria or virus, they can all cause the same immune reaction (which is how vaccines work) but tiny genetic variations in each strain can also drastically change how effective the reaction is against variant. Since bacteria/viruses reproduce very vast and the immune system is very good at its job, you essentially get an accelerated arms race that heavily favors the survival of the fittest. Even one part per million difference in probabilities is almost enough to guarantee the dominance of a single strain.
- tominous 10y ago
  That explains tiny variations, but the article is talking about a shift to a new variant which requires a different immune response. The question is why did this new variant "completely replace" the old ones in the population, instead of just operating in parallel? The only thing I can think of is that the old flu variants were in decline already due to herd immunity, but the article seemed to imply there was more to it than that.

eatbitseveryday 10y ago

I'm a little confused. The figures show number of cases. Higher number of cases = greater risk?