> the immune system [still] works pretty much as we expect from immunology 101 Shocker. Why did we have to learn this again? How were the policies that diverge

> the immune system [still] works pretty much as we expect from immunology 101 Shocker. Why did we have to learn this again? How were the policies that diverged from the immunology 101-based position justified? This should be our starting point and we should not base policies on the opposite conclusion without good evidence to the contrary.