How pandemics strengthen links between viruses and autoimmunity

Mij

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Pandemic insight
The COVID-19 pandemic has pushed the link between viruses and autoimmunity into the spotlight. Over the past year, research suggesting that people with COVID-19 carry numerous autoantibodies in their blood has been widely reported — although the mechanism at play is as yet unclear. Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut, who was responsible for some of this work6, thinks that this autoantibody effect might partly explain the phenomenon of long COVID, in which people experience symptoms weeks or months after their initial infection. Some people’s symptoms might be due to persistent infection with the virus, but others could be experiencing immune dysregulation that leads to the continued targeting of their own cells.

Viral pandemics can do more than simply draw attention to the problem, however — they could also help to solve it. When a person with symptoms of an autoimmune disease first visits a physician, the acute infection that could have resulted in the disease might be a distant memory. Pandemics, however, are population-wide events that can generate a much clearer signal. “The sample size is very large in a pandemic, and the medical community is vigilant for rare effects,” says Steinman.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01835-w
 
Let me try a slightly different abstract.

Introduction: Viruses might be linked to autoimmunity.

Methods: So we allowed at least 193,668,196 people (so far) to get infected with a virus and waited to see if there was a flush of autoimmune disease.

Results: none seemed to turn up.

Conclusion: seems we were wrong.

We have millions of cases of LongCovid and a few hundred cases of weird syndromes in children and from vaccines but autoimmunity - deathly silence. How can people look out on a Sahara of evidence and cry 'what a lovely forest'?

The pandemic has provided us with a really useful piece of information. Viruses are remarkably good at not causing autoimmunity.
 
I'm sure that there is much that is arguable or wrong in that article. For example:
Similarly, the mosquito-borne chikungunya virus typically causes fever and severe joint pain lasting around a week, but it can lead to chronic arthritis. The infection seems to cause T cells to home in on joints, says Altmann.
Even I, being a bit open to the idea that pathogens including chikungunya might cause chronic joint issues, can see that the author took a leap from weak evidence there.

But, the author is suggesting that some infections might trigger a process that eventually leads to autoimmunity. If I was writing an abstract for the article, it would look more like:
Introduction: Viruses might be linked to autoimmunity.

Methods: So we allowed at least 193,668,196 people (so far) to get infected with a virus and waited to see if there was a flush of autoimmune disease.

Results: we haven't seen a great surge in illnesses that are acknowledged to have an autoimmune cause yet, but it's too early to tell.

Conclusion: this is an interesting natural experiment that we should keep an eye on.
 
I had not actually read the article but it is the tired old old story I was familiar with from my student days which my 1999 article in Immunology with Jo Cambridge should have finally put to bed. There is not a scrap of evidence for it. Rather than being at the cutting edge of immunology people like Altman are just picking up 50 year old fag ends.

What to me has always been so weird is that so many scientists can be so selective inter use of evidence. Maybe they should have become priests.

And of course infection does produce long term immunological disease - but WITHOUT any autoimmunity. The problem is something quite different, todo with non-specific shifts in T cell activation (e.g. psoriasis).
 
I've never suspected an autoimmune disease in my case after a viral infection, but there is a high (?) percentage of pwME who suspect they have an autoimmune disease.

Yea because the diagnostic tests are crap* and people haven't picked up a point that @Jonathan Edwards made i.e. if the proposed causal autoantibodies are lowered by rituximab then why didn't people recover when treated with rituximab? OK there could be a few autoimmune cases of ME/CFS i.e. which weren't in the phase 3 rituximab trial.

*there was a paper discussed recently on this forum which uses genetically modified yeast to produce human proteins which are then used to look for autoimmune antibodies - @Jonathan Edwards thought that technology looked promising i.e. to look at ME/CFS.

Hopefully I'm not misquoting Jonathan.
 
I had not actually read the article but it is the tired old old story I was familiar with from my student days which my 1999 article in Immunology with Jo Cambridge should have finally put to bed. There is not a scrap of evidence for it. Rather than being at the cutting edge of immunology people like Altman are just picking up 50 year old fag ends.

What to me has always been so weird is that so many scientists can be so selective inter use of evidence. Maybe they should have become priests.

And of course infection does produce long term immunological disease - but WITHOUT any autoimmunity. The problem is something quite different, todo with non-specific shifts in T cell activation (e.g. psoriasis).

I am just curious, but what do you think causes autoimmunity?
 
I am just curious, but what do you think causes autoimmunity?

Read my paper with Jo Cambridge in Immunology 1999!
B cells operate on a basis of random generation of antibody types with a chain reaction positive feedback loop for mass production when needed. To explain autoimmunity you need to find a way to trick the chain reaction into activating for self. The presence of foreign antigens that look like self does not help - the system as we understand it, should make the right choice. If foreign antigen can trick the system then self antigen, which is around all the time, is much more likely to.

The answer we have proposed, and for which the use of rituximab was a real life test, is that the signalling mechanisms for the chain reaction have predictable Achilles heels where self antigens can interact with antibody in a way that does not follow the normal rules. The simplest example is rheumatoid factor - where the antigen and the antibody are the same class of molecule - which it is not too difficult to see is likely to confuse the signalling.

Perhaps the main reason why something like this must be the answer is that autoantibody production is not like the production of antibody to foreign antigens. The normal rules go to pot. You get IgG produced without IgM or you get VH4-34 bearing B cells producing antibodies in bulk when VH4-34 B cells do not normally do that. The epitopes recognised are skewed in strange ways. Autoantibody production is not just producing antibody to the wrong thing it is antibody production that breaks the rules, which happens to include the rule of not recognising self.

The other thing of course is that almost all autoimmunity seems to come out of the blue NOT following an infection. There is no evidence for any consistent trigger for autoimmune diseases with rare exceptions like procainamide induced lupus-like disease. If autoimmunity arises as a random mistake within the regulation B cells that makes sense. The problem is that we instinctively want to find a causal event in the outside world. And another problem is that most immunologists do not seem toothier too much about checking their hand-waving theories would work in terms of physical chemistry!
 
Last edited:
@Jonathan Edwards

Can I ask what your views are on 'autoimmune Lyme"? thank you.

This was published a few weeks ago:
Abstract
Infectious agents can trigger autoimmune responses in a number of chronic inflammatory diseases. Lyme arthritis, which is caused by the tick-transmitted spirochaete Borrelia burgdorferi, is effectively treated in most patients with antibiotic therapy; however, in a subset of patients, arthritis can persist and worsen after the spirochaete has been killed (known as post-infectious Lyme arthritis). This Review details the current understanding of the pathogenetic events in Lyme arthritis, from initial infection in the skin, through infection of the joints, to post-infectious chronic inflammatory arthritis. The central feature of post-infectious Lyme arthritis is an excessive, dysregulated pro-inflammatory immune response during the infection phase that persists into the post-infectious period. This response is characterized by high amounts of IFNγ and inadequate amounts of the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10. The consequences of this dysregulated pro-inflammatory response in the synovium include impaired tissue repair, vascular damage, autoimmune and cytotoxic processes, and fibroblast proliferation and fibrosis. These synovial characteristics are similar to those in other chronic inflammatory arthritides, including rheumatoid arthritis. Thus, post-infectious Lyme arthritis provides a model for other chronic autoimmune or autoinflammatory arthritides in which complex immune responses can be triggered and shaped by an infectious agent in concert with host genetic factors.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41584-021-00648-5
 
@Jonathan Edwards

Can I ask what your views are on 'autoimmune Lyme"? thank you.

This was published a few weeks ago:


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41584-021-00648-5

The quoted abstract illustrates well how poorly immunologists understand their own terminology (and also the pathology of synovium, which at one time was my special expertise).

A dysregulated inflammatory response is not' autoimmune' unless there is actual immune reactivity to self, as there is in RA or lupus but not in Reiter's, psoriasis, ankylosing spondylitis, parvovirus arthropathy or Lyme. IL-10 is one of the main drivers of antibody production so a lack of IL-10 is not going to favour autoimmunity.

One of the misconceptions that underlies a lot of this theorising is that autoimmunity involves autoimmune T cells but nobody has ever found any of those as far as I can see, except in a very rare genetic thyme condition called AIR.

So the suggestion that Lyme provides a model for autoimmunity is just the sort of dumb idea that is the reason why almost no progress has been made in understanding these illnesses in the last 20 years. Before that we made a lot of progress but immunology has been taken over by the same 'fast-followers', who in themselves generate nothing new, as in so many branches of biomedical science.

In other words the same old, old, tired nonsense.
 
I've seen long-covid referred to an estrogen-associated autoimmune disease. It seems autoimmune is the new buzz word for post-covid syndrome too.
I get the general impression that autoimmune is mostly used as a proxy for "immune but we don't know what causes it". It's not as if we know much about how any of this works anyway, a mere fraction of the whole puzzle at best and likely missing the key pieces. Probably just something that comes from the endless obsession with dismissing environmental factors as less interesting than Freudian-derived thoughts and beliefs, which would be so easy to fix if any of it were real.

There's a visceral disgust with the possibility that much of human disease could come from something so vast and unpredictable, we have developed nothing to take that into account, haven't even begun actually bothering to keep track of all infectious diseases, instead of just the few that we know are dangerous. The scale ratio between viruses and a human body is as wide as the size ratio between a human body and the whole volume of the Earth, and much of it is beyond the reach of current technology.

Humans love predictable patterns and medicine especially so. The idea that any number of the trillions of pathogens and various toxins could be causes of disease in ways that would simply take too much work to figure out is daunting, especially so as efforts in that direction haven't even begun. The safety of digging under the light is still preferable to going into the uncertainty of the wilderness again. Just looking at how much work it took to stop vaporizing lead in the atmosphere and that's just one factor out of basically trillions.
 
Humans love predictable patterns and medicine especially so. The idea that any number of the trillions of pathogens and various toxins could be causes of disease in ways that would simply take too much work to figure out is daunting, especially so as efforts in that direction haven't even begun.
True, but there have been successes. HPV is one:
It's very common – 9 out of 10 people have HPV at some point in their lives. Most people clear the virus without ever knowing they have it. It is when it persists in the cells that some types of HPV can, usually over decades, cause cancer.

Although cervical cancer is the most common type of cancer caused by HPV, it also causes penile, anal and throat cancers in men, and vaginal, vulval, anal and throat cancers in women.

The HPV vaccine protects against around 90% of cervical cancers, however it also provides protection against most of the genital cancers in men caused by HPV infection. Additionally, the vaccine protects against 90% of genital warts in both women and men.
The fact that people realised that a virus that infects nearly everyone can cause cancer decades after the infection is heartening, with the development of a vaccine, and the complicating issue of not all strains of the virus being carcinogenic making the progress even more remarkable.

From memory, the article that is the subject of this thread did mention things like EBV vaccines in the pipeline. Perhaps it will only be possible once such vaccines are rolled out to identify diseases caused by infections that only become obvious years later by their effects on disease incidence in populations.
 
Last edited:
@Jonathan Edwards

Can I ask what your views are on 'autoimmune Lyme"? thank you.

This was published a few weeks ago:


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41584-021-00648-5
Maybe the following two articles could provide a route? Even in generell?? I though don´t know how T-cells and B-cells are linked to each other -


A manganese-rich enviroment supports superoxide dismutase activity in a Lyme disease pathogen, Borrelia Burgdorferi
Aguirre et al 2013

Discussion, 2nd and 3rd paragraph
The accumulation of unusually high manganese in B. burgdorferi that we report here has not been previously documented, although our values are very similar to those published by Ouyang et al. (21). In studies by Posey and Gherardini (15), the manganese in B. burgdorferi cell lysates was reported to be only 2–3-fold higher than that of E. coli and might reflect differential growth conditions used because our cells were grown to near stationary phase. In any case, our findings clearly demonstrate a tremendous capacity for manganese uptake without toxicity in this spirochete. In fact, in our preliminary studies comparing manganese across various species (not shown), the levels of the metal in whole cell B. burgdorferi are comparable with Lactobacillus plantarum, notoriously known for hyperaccumulating manganese without a SOD enzyme (42).

First, in the absence of iron-requiring enzymes, manganese may be more widely used as a co-factor. Consistent with this, we observe a close association with B. burgdorferi manganese and an aminopeptidase (Fig. 2A), a metalloenzyme that employs iron in other organisms (35). Moreover, the ability of B. burgdorferi to accumulate high manganese may represent yet another fascinating adaptation of the organism to the metal starvation response of innate immunity. When infected, the host not only systemically starves pathogens of iron (16, 17), but macrophages and neutrophils attempt to limit manganese bioavailability for the invading species (4345). High manganese is essential for virulence in B. burgdorferi (21), and SodA may only be part of the story.

From the Results, 5th paragraph
In the course of these metal analyses, we noted the spirochete accumulates unusually high levels of manganese. As seen in Fig. 3A, B. burgdorferi accumulated 2 orders of magnitude higher levels of manganese per cell than E. coli grown in BSK medium in parallel. This high level of manganese was seen with both the ML23 and the 297 strain backgrounds and by metal analysis with both AAS and ICP-MS (Fig. 3, A and C). Because cell volumes for the spirochete are difficult to estimate, we normalized manganese on the basis of soluble cellular protein and compared values in B. burgdorferi, E. coli, and the eukaryote, bakers' yeast. Yeast and E. coli are reported to accumulate similar micromolar concentrations of manganese (10, 11), and we also find similar manganese levels in these organisms when analyzed per mg of protein (Fig. 3B). By comparison, the level of manganese that accumulated in B. burgdorferi was 2 orders of magnitude higher (Fig. 3B).

Manganese Increases the Sensitivity of the cGAS-STING Pathway for Double-Stranded DNA and Is Required for the Host Defense against DNA Viruses
Wang et al 2018

Introduction (my bold)
Viral infection triggers host antiviral innate immune responses. Cells use different pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) to detect viral infection by sensing viral nucleic acids (Ablasser et al., 2013, Barrat et al., 2016, Chen et al., 2016, Roers et al., 2016). For cytoplasmic DNA sensing, cGAS (cyclic GMP-AMP [cGAMP] synthase) (Sun et al., 2013) recognizes cytosolic double-stranded DNA and produces the second messenger cGAMP (Civril et al., 2013, Gao et al., 2013, Wu et al., 2013) to activate STING (stimulator of IFN genes, also named MITA/ERIS) (Ishikawa and Barber, 2008, Sun et al., 2009, Zhong et al., 2008). Activation of PRRs leads to the activation of transcription factors NF-κB and interferon regulatory factor IRF3 and/or IRF7, and the production of various cytokines including type I-interferons (IFNs). Type I-IFNs induce the expression of hundreds of interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs), which interfere with almost every step of viral replication, resulting in the establishment of a cellular antiviral state.
Transition metals such as iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), and zinc (Zn) are essential for all forms of life, as 30% of enzymes require a metal cofactor (Hood and Skaar, 2012). Clinical deficiency of either Fe or Zn in the host increases the incidence of infectious disease and mortality (Clark et al., 2016, Stacy et al., 2016). Manganese is one of the most abundant metals in the tissues of mammals, ranging from 0.3 to 2.9 mg/kg wet tissue weight, and is required for a variety of physiological processes including development, reproduction, neuronal function, immune regulation, and antioxidant defenses (Horning et al., 2015, Kwakye et al., 2015). Mn exerts its function by regulating various Mn-dependent enzymes, including oxidoreductases, isomerases, transferases, ligases, lyases, and hydrolases. It is also an essential component of some metalloenzymes such as Mn superoxide dismutase (SOD2), glutamine synthetase (GS), and arginase (Waldron et al., 2009). Although Mn has been implicated in the host-bacteria interface (Corbin et al., 2008, Radin et al., 2016), its function in innate immunity has never been reported.

We identified here a role of Mn2+ in alerting cells to viral infection via sensitizing both cGAS and STING. Mn2+ was liberated from membrane-enclosed organelles and accumulated in the cytosol, and bound to cGAS by increasing both the dsDNA sensitivity and the enzymatic activity of cGAS. Mn2+ also promoted STING’s activity through the enhanced cGAMP-STING binding affinity. The liberated cytosolic Mn2+ thus lowered the detection limit of host cells to dsDNA and virus by several orders of magnitude. Consequently, Mn-deficient mice produced decreased amounts of cytokines and were more vulnerable to DNA viruses as Sting-deficient (Tmem173−/−) mice did. Mn-deficient Tmem173−/− mice displayed no further increased susceptibility to virus compared with Mn-sufficient Tmem173−/− mice. Reconstitution of cellular Mn in Mn-deficient cells effectively restored their responses to DNA viruses. In addition, Mn2+ itself was a potent innate immune stimulator, inducing a type I-IFN response and cytokine production in the absence of any infection. Our results thus demonstrated that Mn is critically involved and required for the host defense against virus.
 
some further details, if it is worth to have a look.

from the Discussion (my bold)
Manganese is an essential constituent of many metalloenzymes and serves as an enzyme activator. The normal concentrations of Mn range from 0.072 μM to 0.27 μM in human blood (Aschner and Aschner, 200) and from 20 μM to 53 μM in human brain (Bowman and Aschner, 2014). We observed that THP1 cells, a cell line derived from peripheral blood, started to gain antiviral activity when the medium Mn2+ level reached 2 μM. Thus, the concentrations of Mn2+ required to activate innate immunity appeared to be within the physiological range. We further demonstrated that the cytosolic Mn levels increased 60 times to 5.8–6.8 μM after virus infection. Critically, Mn2+ supported cGAS to produce cGAMP with low levels of dsDNA while Mg2+ didn’t at all. The elevated cytosolic Mn2+ thus significantly lowered the detection limit of cells to cytosolic dsDNA or DNA viruses. Accordingly, Mn-deficient mice were highly susceptible to DNA virus as Tmem173−/− mice did. Accumulation of extracellular soluble Mn was also observed. It is conceivable that the extracellular Mn was released by virus-infected cells, both alive and pyroptotic. In fact, the increased Mn contents in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, white blood cells, and alveolar macrophages in virus-infected mice confirmed the physiological relevance of the Mn extracellular release, suggesting that Mn alerts host both locally at the site of infection and systemically through the circulation. Interestingly, Burleson’s group reported that a single intraperitoneal injection of 10, 20, or 40 μg MnCl2/g body weight caused significantly enhanced NK activity, probably mediated by the production of type I-IFNs (Smialowicz et al., 1988). Although the amount of Mn used in that work was 10 times higher than what we used (10–40 μg versus 1–2 μg MnCl2/g body weight), we believe that it was most likely through the cGAS-STING activation.
Mn2+ is very similar to Mg2+ in terms of the chemical properties. Previous work showed that Mn2+ is able to replace Mg2+ in vitro in almost half of Mg2+-dependent enzymes, in which the catalytic activity of the enzymes are often maintained (Wedler, 1993). In this study, however, we found that Mn2+ not only replaces Mg2+ in cGAS activation, but also enhances its enzymatic activity and ligand sensitivity. Similar results have been reported in the insulin receptor associated protein kinase, the kinase activity of which was activated substantially by Mn2+, but not by Mg2+ (Suzuki et al., 1987, Wente et al., 1990). It is possible that cGAS binds Mn-ATP much tighter than Mg-ATP, thereby activating cGAS. Alternatively, Mn2+ may induce an activating conformational change of cGAS protein. The crystal structure of cGAS with Mg2+ or Mn2+, probably in the presence of ATP/GTP, will provide insight into the detailed mechanism. Nevertheless, we found that in contrast to Mg2+, cGAS incubated with Mn2+ is inclined to precipitate, suggesting that Mn2+ may induce cGAS protein into a compact conformation which is easier to be activated. Unfortunately, this feature disallowed us to test the interaction of cGAS with ATP, GTP, or dsDNA in the presence of Mn2+. In addition, Mn2+ promoted STING activation through the enhanced cGAMP-STING affinity. This result agreed with previous work showing that Mn2+ promotes the dimerization of c-di-GMP and 3′3’-cGAMP (Roembke et al., 2014, Stelitano et al., 2013). Mn is the only essential metal of which the transportation and the subcellular distribution in organelles are not defined (Horning et al., 2015, Kwakye et al., 2015). We found that upon DNA virus infection, Mn2+ is liberated from mitochondria and/or Golgi apparatus, the major intracellular reservoirs for Mn2+ storage. In addition, free Mn2+ may also be released from Mn-binding proteins such as metallothioneins and calprotectin, an Mn2+-sequestering protein constituting about 40% of the total cytoplasmic protein in neutrophils (Brophy and Nolan, 2015), and/or albumin, the major Mn2+-binding protein in plasma (Foradori et al., 1967, Rabin et al., 1993). The released Mn2+ from organelles and Mn2+-binding proteins altogether leads to the elevated cytosolic Mn2+ and the activation of cGAS-STING pathway. However, excessive exposure or accumulation of Mn is harmful to the central nervous system due to its preferential Mn uptake by the brains and spinal cords. It is reported that Manganism occurs in response to acute Mn exposures, while Parkinsonism may result from long-term exposure to low levels of Mn (Martinez-Finley et al., 2013). In fact, the cellular toxicity of Mn (mainly exerted by Mn2+) has long been recognized and attributed to multiple mechanisms, nevertheless the molecular basis is still inconclusive, or even contradictory in some cases (Horning et al., 2015). In particular, elevated type I-IFNs were implicated in the development of Parkinson’s disease. In some extreme cases, type I-IFN treatment caused severe Parkinsonism that was resolved after interferon withdrawal (Mizoi et al., 1997, Sarasombath et al., 2002). We showed that Mn2+ accumulation causes prominent innate immune activation, leading to the production and secretion of cytokines. Such pathological immune activation in the central nervous system will certainly contribute to the cellular and tissue damage, culminating in Manganism and Parkinsonism. These findings therefore may provide new insights into the molecular basis underlying the development of Manganism, in which Mn-caused toxicity has long been recognized. New therapeutic attempts should focus to prevent this detrimental immune activation in the central nervous system.


In the first chapter of the Results they describe how they discovered the Mn-dependency (my bold)
During our daily experiments, we noticed repeatedly that cellular antiviral activity differed dramatically among distinct cell states under different culture conditions. We reasoned that some components in culture medium may influence such activity in cells. To search for potential factors involved, we focused on the basic components in the culture medium, including serum, carbohydrates, amino acids, vitamins, trace elements, fatty acids, and some metabolites and salts critical for cell growth. A human leukemia monocytic cell line, THP1, was pretreated with different amounts of each component for 24 hr before cells were infected with GFP-tagged vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV-GFP). After another 18 hr, cells were analyzed for viral infection by flow cytometry. The mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of viral-GFP was used as an indicator of viral propagation (Figures S1A–S1E, concentrations of metabolite composition are listed in the Table S4). We found that Vitamin D3, a prehormone that is implicated in regulating the synthesis of hundreds of enzymes, restricted the propagation of viruses in a dose-dependent manner as indicated by the significantly reduced MFI of viral-GFP (Figure 1A, indicated by ∗), which agreed with previous reports showing that vitamin D3 is an antiviral agent against hepatitis C virus (HCV) in human hepatocytes (Abu-Mouch et al., 2011, Gal-Tanamy et al., 2011). We also found that lower concentrations of fetal bovine serum (FBS) in culture medium made otherwise unresponsive tumor cells sensitive to cytosolic dsDNA and DNA viruses and that higher FBS concentrations abrogated such sensitivity in sensitive cells (Fang et al., 2017b, Wang et al., 2017). However, we found that MnCl2-treated cells were almost completely resistant to VSV infection (Figure 1B, indicated by ∗). To confirm this result and to exclude viral type specificity, MnCl2-treated THP1 cells were infected with distinct types of GFP-expressing viruses, either DNA viruses (Herpes simplex virus 1 [HSV-1] or RNA viruses (Newcastle disease [NDV] and VSV). We found that MnCl2-pretreated cells acquired resistance to all tested viruses (Figure 1C). We next tested this virus-resistant effect by adding different concentrations of Mn and observed that THP1 cells started to gain antiviral activity when the Mn2+ level in medium reached 2 μM (Figure 1D), in which the propagation of HSV-1 and VSV was suppressed. Whereas 5 μM (for VSV) or 20 μM (for HSV-1 and NDV) of MnCl2 inhibited virus infection, 50 μM of MnCl2 essentially rendered cells complete protection from all the viruses (Figures 1D and 1E). The cytosolic Mn concentration, measured by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) after MnCl2 treatment, accumulated approximately to a concentration 10 times higher than that in the medium within 6–18 hr (Figure S1F). These data indicated that the elevated cytosolic manganese functions to inhibit viral infection. ...
 
I had not actually read the article but it is the tired old old story I was familiar with from my student days which my 1999 article in Immunology with Jo Cambridge should have finally put to bed. There is not a scrap of evidence for it. Rather than being at the cutting edge of immunology people like Altman are just picking up 50 year old fag ends.

While there is no evidence for any sort of generalised increase in autoimmunity risk, you do agree that certain infections can trigger specific acute autoimmune syndromes?

Such as Guillain Barre Syndrome and the various autoimmune throbocytopenia and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndromes.

Each can be explained by specific mechanisms of B-cell cocapture of self-foreign antigen complexes.

I also note that while there is strong evidence linking cases of Guillain Barre Syndrome with Campylobacter Jejuni infection, and the most popular mechanism hypothesis is molecular mimicry, it is not the only hypothesis that can explain the phenomena and it also does not explain the association of GBS with other infections where there are no clear mimic sequences of sufficient size. (and I'd expect molecular mimicry to lead to immune tolerance, rather than autoimmunity...)

Also notably, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndromes and GBS have also been associated with antibodies targeted towards complexes, such as multiple gangliosides or CXCL4 bound to proteoglycan complexes. All of the known or suspected infectious triggers of GBS all contain antigens that have strong evidence of binding to gangliosides, for example. Given that SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins are known to strongly bind to specific proteoglycans, it doesn't take much imagination to suggest a mechanism for the thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome associated with COVID in patients who haven't received anti-coagulant therapies (or the associated vaccine syndrome).

I wish more researchers would focus on this angle of research in attempting to explain these syndromes, but most research seem to be focused on general/non-specific associations or T-cell BS.
 
Back
Top Bottom