Autoimmune diseases, including multiple sclerosis and type 1 diabetes mellitus, affect about 5% of the worldwide population. In the last decade, reports have accumulated on various autoimmune disorders, such as idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura, myopericarditis, primary ovarian failure, and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), following vaccination. In this review, we discuss the possible underlying mechanisms of autoimmune reactions following vaccinations and review cases of autoimmune diseases that have been correlated with vaccination. Molecular mimicry and bystander activation are reported as possible mechanisms by which vaccines can cause autoimmune reactions. The individuals who might be susceptible to develop these reactions could be especially not only those with previous post-vaccination phenomena and those with allergies but also in individuals who are prone to develop autoimmune diseases, such as those with a family history of autoimmunity or with known autoantibodies, and the genetic predisposed individuals.Further research is encouraged into the direct associations between vaccines and autoimmune conditions, and the biological mechanisms behind them.

Electromagnetic therapy is a non-invasive and safe approach for the management of several pathological conditions including neurodegenerative diseases. Parkinson’s disease is a neurodegenerative pathology caused by abnormal degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the ventral tegmental area and substantia nigra pars compacta in the midbrain resulting in damage to the basal ganglia. Electromagnetic therapy has been extensively used in the clinical setting in the form of transcranial magnetic stimulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy which can also be used in the domestic setting. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms and therapeutic applications of electromagnetic therapy to alleviate motor and non-motor deficits that characterize Parkinson’s disease.

Objective: Urinary incontinence (UI) is one of the most common urinary system diseases that mostly affects women but also men. We evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of functional magnetic stimulation (FMS) as potential UI treatment with improvements in the pelvic floor musculature, urodynamic tests and quality of life.Methods: A total of 20 UI patients (10 females and 10 men, mean age 64, 14 years), including 10 with stress UI, four with urgency UI and six with mixed UI, were treated with FMS (20 min/session) twice a week for 3 weeks. The patients' impressions, records in urinary diaries, and scores of three life stress questionnaires (overactive bladder symptom questionnaire [OAB‐q], urogenital distress inventory questionnaire‐short form [UDI‐6], incontinence impact questionnaire‐short form [IIQ‐7]) were performed pre‐ and post‐treatment.Results: Significant reductions (P < 0.01) of micturition number and nocturia after magnetic treatment were evidenced. The urodynamic tests recorded a significant increase in cystometric capacity (147 ± 51.3%), in maximum urethral closure pressure (110 ± 34%), in urethral functional length (99.8 ± 51.8%), and in pressure transmission ratio (147 ± 51.3%) values compared with the baseline values.Conclusions: These preliminary findings suggest that FMS with Magneto STYM (twice weekly for 3 weeks) improves the UI and may be an effective treatment for this urogenital disease.

The innate immune system, through pattern recognition receptors, intercepts any kind of pathogen and reacts through chemotactic, phagocyting, cytokines-secreting and cell-killing mechanisms in a very quick and effective way. Meanwhile, the adaptive immunity arm, through dendritic and T and B cells memory activation, is alerted and starts, more slowly, to produce antibodies, seen thanks to the progress of immunological investigations in comparative vertebrates, invertebrates, and vegetal models. However, it has been stated that the innate immune system also displays adaptive potential in terms of reinfection resistance through immune memory, in addition to the modulation of responses against repeated low doses of lipopolysaccharides (Lps) or cross-immunization, starting from one pathogenic species and extending to others.