Unless I am very much mistaken variolation is specific to smallpox.
Edited to add. I am not mistaken, I was just trying to be polite in some ill-attempt not to get voted down so quickly and hidden out of sight, but since that didn’t work:
THE USAGE OF THE TERM “VARIOLATION” IN THIS SITUATION SHOWS A DISTINCT LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE WORD MEANS.
Shockingly poor practice IMO. I find it disappointing at how readily it’s been accepted, repeated and defended without any apparent thought.
EDITED TO ADD INFORMATION I’VE PUT IN OTHER COMMENTS:
using a live (unmodified) virus to stimulate immunity is still a VACCINATION.
with a”live vaccine”
Different routes of administration have also got names.
by scratch is known as
“scarification” , or “percutaneous vaccination” or “scratch vaccination”
Words are used to convey meaning. No one who has read more than a sentence on this topic thinks that Robin and Zvi are proposing the use of dried scabs. Vaccination is a word in common use for all diseases despite originally referring specifically to inoculation by cowpox (‘vacca’ = ‘cow’). And it has a highly relevant parallel twin that refers specifically to the inoculation by the live dangerous virus, variolation.
I’ve edited the post you answered to include stuff I’ve posted in other comments.
Words are used to convey meaning.
I totally agree. Which is why I’ve been pushing the point that the meaning of variolation is not what people here seem to accept it as.
Vaccination is a word in common use for all diseases
Indeed. And it’s the word that should be used here.
A starting point for increasing knowledge of the subject: live-vaccines (edit to add: not a good link for differentiating between true live and live attenuated/modified vaccines, my mistake.)
highly relevant parallel twin that refers specifically to the inoculation by the live dangerous virus, variolation.
NO.
Using a live virus is a known as a “live virus vaccination”.
Can you find ANY evidence that variolation is an acceptable term for any disease other than smallpox?
No it isn’t. Quoting your own source “ Live vaccines contain a weakened or attenuated form of a virus or bacteria.”. That is not what is suggested here.
Intentional infection through controlled means with the contagious virus hasn’t been used since Smallpox (as opposed to pox parties). There is no accepted term. The meaning was immediately clear to me on first reading it. It appears to be a successful reintroduction if a word for an analogous purpose. It’s even unique enough to be googleable.
A true “live vaccine” is different from “live-attenuated” vaccine. (you’re right re the link, it doesn’t make the differentiation clear and is poor referencing on my part.)
Due to the increased risks of “live vaccines” (and the ability to attenuate the infective agent in the majority of cases) they are rare but they do exist and are the subject of research.
For example:
Used for military personnel: Adenovirus vaccine contains live adenovirus
It makes a bit more sense why “variolation” is the term being knocked around since the post refers to giving the vaccination by scratching the skin but variolation shouldn’t be used when talking about viruses other than smallpox.
This method of administration is known as:
“scarification vaccination” or “percutaneous vaccine”
” Variolation is an inoculation technique whereby a scab or pus from an individual with a mild smallpox infection is introduced into the nose or mouth of healthy individuals.”
The Chinese practiced the oldest documented use of variolation, dating back to the fifteenth century.
According to such documentation, mild smallpox cases were selected as donors in order to prevent serious attack. The technique used scabs that had been left to dry out for some time. Fresh scabs were more likely to lead to a full-blown infection. Three or four scabs were ground into powder or mixed with a grain of musk and bound in cotton. Infected material was then packed into a pipe and puffed up the patient’s nostril.
Variolation is usually thought of in the (English-speaking) medical world as:
The procedure was most commonly carried out by inserting/rubbing powdered smallpox scabs or fluid from pustules into superficial scratches made in the skin.
Variolation is about smallpox. A term that should not be applied to covid19 or any other virus/disease.
What Robin describes as “deliberate low dose infection” is the process of vaccination using a live virus (as apposed to live-attenuated or dead virus vaccine).
Question—why is the term variolation being used?
Unless I am very much mistaken variolation is specific to smallpox.
Edited to add. I am not mistaken, I was just trying to be polite in some ill-attempt not to get voted down so quickly and hidden out of sight, but since that didn’t work:
THE USAGE OF THE TERM “VARIOLATION” IN THIS SITUATION SHOWS A DISTINCT LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE WORD MEANS.
Shockingly poor practice IMO. I find it disappointing at how readily it’s been accepted, repeated and defended without any apparent thought.
EDITED TO ADD INFORMATION I’VE PUT IN OTHER COMMENTS:
using a live (unmodified) virus to stimulate immunity is still a VACCINATION.
with a”live vaccine”
Different routes of administration have also got names.
by scratch is known as
“scarification” , or “percutaneous vaccination” or “scratch vaccination”
other routes of vaccine administration include:
intranasal, intraocular, intramuscular, subcuteneous , intraperitoneal, oral, sublingual …
Using variolation exposes the lack of basic medical/immunological knowledge of the author/s.
IF lesswrong wants to be taken seriously on this subject using the correct terminology would help significantly.
My comments are of no benefit to me—they are for lesswrong.
And down-votes are not going to stop me wanting to help, but do provide some amusement at the rat-reactions to being challenged.
Words are used to convey meaning. No one who has read more than a sentence on this topic thinks that Robin and Zvi are proposing the use of dried scabs. Vaccination is a word in common use for all diseases despite originally referring specifically to inoculation by cowpox (‘vacca’ = ‘cow’). And it has a highly relevant parallel twin that refers specifically to the inoculation by the live dangerous virus, variolation.
I’ve edited the post you answered to include stuff I’ve posted in other comments.
I totally agree. Which is why I’ve been pushing the point that the meaning of variolation is not what people here seem to accept it as.
Indeed. And it’s the word that should be used here.
A starting point for increasing knowledge of the subject: live-vaccines (edit to add: not a good link for differentiating between true live and live attenuated/modified vaccines, my mistake.)
NO.
Using a live virus is a known as a “live virus vaccination”.
Can you find ANY evidence that variolation is an acceptable term for any disease other than smallpox?
No it isn’t. Quoting your own source “ Live vaccines contain a weakened or attenuated form of a virus or bacteria.”. That is not what is suggested here.
Intentional infection through controlled means with the contagious virus hasn’t been used since Smallpox (as opposed to pox parties). There is no accepted term. The meaning was immediately clear to me on first reading it. It appears to be a successful reintroduction if a word for an analogous purpose. It’s even unique enough to be googleable.
A true “live vaccine” is different from “live-attenuated” vaccine. (you’re right re the link, it doesn’t make the differentiation clear and is poor referencing on my part.)
Due to the increased risks of “live vaccines” (and the ability to attenuate the infective agent in the majority of cases) they are rare but they do exist and are the subject of research.
For example:
Used for military personnel: Adenovirus vaccine contains live adenovirus
adenovirus type 4 and type 7 vaccine, live
and:
A Study to Assess the Safety of Live Intranasal Sendai Virus Vaccine in Children and Toddlers
(for “croup” rather than disease caused by sendai virus)
Using a live unattenuated dose of COVID to stimulate immunity would fall into the live vaccination category.
Robin Hanson started it. [EDIT: he wasn’t the first; see FactorialCode’s reply.]
No he didn’t. The idea and terminology has been bouncing around the rat-sphere a bit earlier than that.
Thanks for that info.
It makes a bit more sense why “variolation” is the term being knocked around since the post refers to giving the vaccination by scratching the skin but variolation shouldn’t be used when talking about viruses other than smallpox.
This method of administration is known as:
“scarification vaccination” or “percutaneous vaccine”
Thank you for replying and for the link.
Which is missing some key points about variolation. wikipedia.org/wiki/Variolation
Firstly to expand on the definition Robin used:
Variolation is usually thought of in the (English-speaking) medical world as:
Variolation is about smallpox. A term that should not be applied to covid19 or any other virus/disease.
What Robin describes as “deliberate low dose infection” is the process of vaccination using a live virus (as apposed to live-attenuated or dead virus vaccine).