Rapid development and deployment of vaccines greatly reduced mortality and morbidity during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most widely used COVID-19 vaccines approved by national regulatory authorities require intramuscular administration. SARS-CoV-2 initially infects the upper respiratory tract where the infection can be eliminated with little or no symptoms by an effective immune response. Failure to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract results in lower respiratory tract infections that can lead to severe disease and death. Presently used intramuscularly administered COVID-19 vaccines are effective in reducing severe disease and mortality but are not entirely able to prevent asymptomatic and mild infections as well as person to person transmission of the virus. Individual and population differences also influence susceptibility to infection and the propensity to develop severe disease. This article provides a perspective on the nature and the mode of delivery COVID-19 vaccines that can optimize protective immunity in the upper respiratory tract to reduce infections and virus transmission as well as severe disease.

Current theories of autoimmunity are diverse, sometimes contradictory, and suffer from incompleteness. Although substantial evidence exists that adaptive and innate immunity, sex, genetic predisposition, and the microbiome all play essential roles in autoimmune disease etiologies and pathogenesis, and that antigen processing is altered during disease induction, no existing theory integrates all of these factors through a single, coherent mechanism. In an attempt to focus the field on the need to elucidate such an integrative mechanism, I propose one possibility here that, if nothing else, helps to identify the nature of the problems that need to be addressed. My theory is that autoimmune diseases are induced by normal immunological responses to unique pairs of complementary antigens, at least one of which is a molecular mimic of a host target. Each antigen in the complementary pair induces a complementary immune response (T or B cell); although each immune response is idiotypic in origin, the antigenic complementarity results in what appears to be an idiotype-anti-idiotype relationship between the responses. Additionally, because of the antigenic complementarity, each immune response mimics one of antigens, abrogating the distinction between self and non-self. If at least one of the antigens mimics a host antigen, then the resulting immunological civil war spreads to a host tissue. Complementary antigens also alter antigen processing so that antigens that would normally be proteolytically digested are presented by the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) to T and B cell receptors inducing a cross-reactive immune response. The resulting civil war is supported by the innate immune system due to the complementarity of the initiating antigens.. Complementary antigens stimulate synergistic toll-like receptors (TLR) and/or nucleotide-binding oligomerization receptors (NOD) resulting in up-regulation of cytokine production and further stimulation of the adaptive immune response. Because the immune responses (e.g., antibodies) mimic the initiating antigens, this synergistic activation of innate immunity becomes chronic. Additionally, TLR and NOD function are highly sensitive to sex hormones, some becoming up-regulated and some down-regulated in the presence of either testosterone or estrogens. This sensitivity explains how sex modifies susceptibility to autoimmune diseases. Genetic mutations in TLR, NOD and MHC further alter antigen presentation and the degree to which antigens stimulate an immune response explaining how genetics also modifies susceptibility. Finally, sex hormones also alter the host microbiome, which in turn modulates autoimmune disease risk by shaping the immunological nature of self and by mediating susceptibility to microbial infection. Moreover, it appears that the microbiome camouflages itself from the immune system by mimicking the host antigenic repertoire; the mimicry between the antigens of the microbiome and the host results in selective attacks on microbiome constituents concomitant with any autoimmune attack on host tissues. This antigenic complementarity theory thereby integrates all major elements known to affect, or be affected by, autoimmune diseases and provides a set of testable implications.

Aquaculture is rapidly becoming one of the pivotal sectors in the farm economy, driven by the increasing demand for high-quality animal protein at an affordable cost, especially with the escalating human population. However, the expansion of high-density fish populations also brings forth a challenge – the rapid transmission and spread of infectious disease agents among them. To combat this, vaccination is emerging as a reliable and standardized method for providing immunity against viral and bacterial outbreaks. The ideal vaccine is expected to be safe, effective, economical, and easily administered. The fish vaccination industry continually publishes new information on fish immunology and vaccinology, contributing to the improvement of vaccine formulation and efficacy. This review aims to offer insights into the current status of bacterial, viral, and parasitic diseases, discuss existing vaccinations, and address potential industry-threatening diseases like infectious edwardsiellosis, motile aeromonas septicemia, TiLV, salmon anemia, vibriosis, and white spot disease. Technological advancements have played a crucial role in enhancing our understanding of fish immunological mechanisms, leading to improved vaccine administration and the development of recombinant live attenuated, subunit, DNA, and RNA vaccines. However, challenges such as oral tolerance, vaccine degradation, and stressful environments persist, impacting vaccine efficacy. Addressing these challenges and gaining a deeper understanding of the fish immune system and host-pathogen interactions will be pivotal for future improvements, contributing to the sustainability of aquaculture and enhancing global food security.

The SARS-CoV-2-induced acute COVID-19 pandemic disorder seems to have begun all of the sudden in 2020, with very little data available regarding prior times in which people experienced mysterious flu-like illness symptoms characteristic of the pandemic disease. The scientific community seems to be divided into a few parts with regards to the belief of the kind of viral origins. A significant number of scientists believe that the virus solely has natural origins and that it underwent a thorough process of zoonosis, independent of laboratory research-based research that would only catalyse zoonosis due to helping the virus gain additional function of transmission and virulence. Many other scientists believe that the virus has wide origins characteristic of “gain-of-function” laboratory research, whilst many other scientists believe that most of the viral genome has natural origins, with the zoonotic process having been artificially catalysed only in its latter part of transmission to humans. Considerable extent of scientific evidence suggests that the virus underwent a restricted, but considerable extent of “gain-of-function” research, prior to having been accidentally leaked into the nearby environment, whilst its process of zoonotic spillover into humans was influenced by such events, given for example the multidimensional pathogenetic process displayed by the virus and its main antigen of action, the spike glycoprotein, causing all kinds of immune pathophysiology - including transient immunosuppression. Investigations into the origins of the novel coronavirus have been lasting for years, seemingly with no concrete end in sight, and the available molecular testing methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection displaying less than perfect results have not significantly helped the process. Evidence even started pointing toward the existence of artificial, laboratory research-based viral origins, exposing a probable accidentally-induced artificial process of “accelerated viral evolution”, which could be particularly dangerous because of the nature of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogenic agent. Likewise, it is possible that the prevention of distribution of scientific data regarding scenarios as such in fact constitutes censorship, rather than regulation of data that may be considered not to be significantly evidence based. Simultaneously, it is important not to regard all hypotheses and preliminary reports of scientific research as evidence-based, but to ensure that due diligence is performed in all cases. The integrity of scientific research and ultimately of the innovation process of medical solutions depends on the integrity of democracy and the rule of law, as well as on regulating partnerships with scientific companies from world nations where autocracy rules their society.