From: Trawley Trash on
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:29:18 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> > Okay guys, get to the point instead of discussing different
> > religions. Autoimmunity does exist and there are powerful
> > mechanisms to prevent it such as the clonal deletion, receptor
> > editing and anergy put to work as early as during the embryonic
> > development.

Of course autoimmunity exists. I do not doubt that there are
mechanisms for reducing it (as opposed to preventing it).

My point is that we know the lymphocytes attach to small patterns
on the surface of proteins. The potential for misrecognition
is always there. By your choice of words you keep insisting that
there is something that can function perfectly.

If you understand evolution, then you know that this perfection is
impossible. Those hardwired immunity patterns in our DNA are set up
to mutate especially rapidly. This is how life evolves into different
population groups that cannot share the same environment. Eventually
the groups become species that cannot interbreed.

You claim to know what is supposed to be food and what is not supposed
to be food. What I say is that one man's meat is another man's
poison. This contradicts the food laws in Leviticus as well as the
dietary laws of Moslems and Hindus. Even the Chinese seem to think that
everyone should eat rice, and this is not true.

To come back to your example, some people can eat soy, but some
cannot. Those who think they know what we all should eat evidence
the clarity of madmen and religious fanatics. You would poison us
or infect us with worms so that we can all be the same. This is
your religion: not mine. You have discovered the greatest medical
breakthrough since physicians began using leeches to balance our four
(or six) humors.

From: Trawley Trash on
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:40:59 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> > My point is that we know the lymphocytes attach to small patterns
> > on the surface of proteins. The potential for misrecognition
> > is always there. By your choice of words you keep insisting that
> > there is something that can function perfectly.
>
> No. You keep bringing up "perfection" and "cure." I keep saying
> "better" or "worse."
>
> You're having an argument inside your head with yourself.
>
> You've made the good the enemy of the perfect.

Not at all. Perfect does not exist in a world where everything
is evolving. These were your exact words:

> > Autoimmunity does exist and there are powerful
> > mechanisms to prevent it such as the clonal deletion, receptor
> > editing and anergy put to work as early as during the embryonic
> > development.

You are claiming that "powerful mechanisms *prevent* (autoimmunity).
Even the one of the papers you cited points out that this does *not*
work perfectly.

What I am saying is that based on evolution and DNA the immune system
has certain things that it can not do. One of those is to recognize
"self".

> Well, you have problems with your view of the immune system. First,
> B-cell receptor editting is its own little evolutionary dance of
> recombination and variation. That is to say, B cells are constantly
> evolving in their own way. Without helminths, there seems to be a
> severe problem with quality control. The question here is whether a
> preexisting autoimmune condition created by a lack of helminths can
> be remedied by reintroducing helminths into the gut. Many people say
> it can. Many people have experienced a recovery - and this has been
> shown in clinical trial data.

Of course we also know that helminths will reduce an immune reaction
that might reject them. This may by itself cause "recovery".

> > You claim to know what is supposed to be food and what is not
> > supposed to be food.
>
> I made no claim about that.

My friend's claim was that autoimmune conditions are allergies.
Typically they are food allergies. I probably did not make
that clear enough.

I did not believe it myself at the time.

> You made that claim. If I were to make
> a statement about diet, it would be based on evolution. On what
> diets did different groups with different genes evolve?

I would prefer to use a progessive tense here, as this is
an ongoing process. Food allergies are heredity, and often
the symptoms are subtle. In my case they attack my pancreas.
I found my blood glucose meter was the most sensitive symptom
that I have. Diabetes is considered an autoimmune disease,
and exposure to wheat or milk causes it (for me).

> On what diets did different groups with different genes evolve?

*cough*

That is Lysenkoism not evolution. Evolution says that
diets become different because of genetic variation.

> You invoke evolution and yet you fail to employ it properly.

You know something? That's a real howler.

> I'm not suggesting we "poison" people with helminths.

You give us the choice of poisoning ourselves with a "normal"
diet or infecting us with helminths. That is a false
dichotomy.

I did not say helminths were poison.

> I'm suggesting that throughout human history, man has been colonized
> with one form of helminth or another.

And Ferdinand Feghoot has traveled through space and time to
be sure this is true? Or maybe you have a reference?

> Some caused disease but others were well
> adapted to their human hosts. When these helminths were yanked out
> of the body by purifying the water supply, we were "poisoned."

Mm hmm. Pure water is poison. </sarcasm>

> Our regulatory T-cells and regulatory B-cells could no longer function
> the way they were designed.

They were not designed. They evolved.

> These are all well-supported theories
> that have been developed in the last five to ten years.

Your papers are recent, but those theories are not. I've been
rejecting them for at least thirty years. If I am not mistaken
they date back to something from the middle ages. The Talmud
perhaps. I have heard it over and over again that allergies
and other immune system problems are caused by being too clean.

The first time I remember hearing this theory was in 1965. Give
us another ten years of your medical advances, and surgeons will
operate without washing up.

> If your
> information on immunity is thirty years old, then you are indeed at a
> disadvantage in this conversation.

When I run across recent papers on immunology, I can follow them by
looking a lot of things up. But the information never seems to
have connected with the medical community. When I see a paper
on medical research in the area, I barf.

> > This is
> > your religion: not mine. You have discovered the greatest medical
> > breakthrough since physicians began using leeches to balance our
> > four (or six) humors.
>
> If you choose to cast clinical trial data as "religion" there is
> really no further point to this conversation.
>
> Gastroenterology. 2005 Apr;128(4):825-32
>
> Trichuris suis therapy for active ulcerative colitis: a randomized
> controlled trial.
> Summers RW, Elliott DE, Urban JF Jr, Thompson RA, Weinstock JV.
> James A. Clifton Center for Digestive Diseases, Department of
> Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine,
> Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA.

Yup, religion. My doctor accused me of secretly taking drugs
when he saw my latest blood sugar levels. I wrote him a long
letter about my allergies the day I went to see him in July.
In October I showed him a graph how my blood sugar declined
after I stopped using milk. In May I was cured. He wants
me to come back for more expensive tests.

I agree that further discussion is pointless.