Unpleasant Theory of Vaccines Promi

[Dmitry Yuryev]

   I would greatly appreciate any interest to my work advertized
hereon. This paper is very well known to immunological 
establishment; yet, understandably, it was subjected to open 
censorship. I was expelled from work and, more recently, from 
New York Acad.Sci. after attempts to publish it. 
   As it can be understood from the first sentence of summary, 
the paper deals with a rather ancient controversy: the fact is that 
nobody else but Louis Pasteur was ostracized and even 
challenged to a duel after attempt to debate EXATLY this same 
theme in 1880 (see e.g. R.Vallery-Radot: La vie de Pasteur). And it 
really still remains to be an extremely insulting issue.
   I am afraid, the summary below is less comprehensible than 
average report of wonder cancer or AIDS treatment with enema, 
chinese cucumber or ultragenetic quasitherapy. Most dreadfully, it 
contains a sort of "common sense logic" traditionally unpalatable
for medical science. Yet, I hope, the major claim is still idiotically
trivial: instead of catching 100 common colds at a rate of twice
a year during lifetime it is possible to have all hundred at once
and live happily everafter.
>
-----------------------
        TOWARD UNDERSTANDING OF VACCINES
>
  Dmitriy K.YURYEV  e-mail yur77 at glas.apc.org
>
   It is a dreadful secret of modern medicine that it is still 
absolutely not known what makes the smallpox vaccine 
(discovered 200 years ago) to function as vaccine. This gap in 
knowledge seems to be the most obvious cause of the failure in 
quest for AIDS vaccine and, more generally, for failure of the 
whole "new generation" of high-tech vaccines. So to say, new 
vaccines do not work because it is not known why old vaccines do.
   This speculative work reviews a rather entangled political 
and historical background of this problem and presents its direct 
hypothetical solution proposing a trivial explanation for the 
phenomenon of transmutation of virulent viruses into vaccines 
(i.e. for what was called "attenuation" by L.Pasteur). It is based on 
two principal assertions:
   1. Contrary to the popular view that immune system cannot 
cope with more than 25 antigens simultaneously, I think that this 
number is much bigger, so it may be possible to achieve 
protection from rapidly mutating microbe by immunising against 
all its antigenic forms simultaneously.
   2. This opportunity is used at least in such vaccines as those 
for rabies and smallpox; i.e. these vaccines are actually the 
cocktails containing complete repertoires of antigenic forms of 
corresponding viruses rather than wild viruses undergone some 
miraculous "attenuating" mutation.
   If correct, these ideas promise nothing less than cures for 
AIDS, malaria and with much less certainty even for cancer. Great 
advantage is that testing experiments may be most conveniently 
conducted on such disease as common cold, protective  vaccine 
for which seems possible to be developed and tested within 
several weeks of work