From: Trawley Trash on
On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 21:41:37 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> Different species of helminths may have different effects on
> innate/sympathetic response at different parts of their lifecycle.
> The presence of phosphorylcholine in ES-62 suggests to me the
> involvement of the cholinergic nervous system, which balances out
> sympathetic flow.

Do you maintain that eating raw beef could introduce parasites and
thus prevent celiac?

From: Trawley Trash on
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:30:00 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> The parasites from raw beef tend to be pretty unhealthy but there are
> some helminths in the water supply that confer substantial protection
> against autoimmune disease without many negative side effects.

So helminths in raw beef are unhealthy, but the helminths in
fecal-contaminated water are good for us. Is that what
you mean?

I confess I do have a problem with an unstated assumption behind
your postings: People who cannot eat gluten are ill, but people
with intestinal parasites are healthy.

From: Trawley Trash on
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:28:10 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> It depends on the helminth species. Some of these can be quite
> dangerous when they're not well adapted to life in their host - like
> malaria. All or most of these helminths appear to suppress
> autoimmunity.

There is no such thing as autoimmunity. The mechanism for
detecting "self" from "not self" comes from religion and
not science.

> Even in M.S. patients, having a tapeworm or malaria
> makes M.S. more tolerable than not having a helminth infection.

What Helminths do is lower immunity so that they will not be
rejected by their hosts. In cases of allergy (such as autoimmunity)
or transplants they might help, but lowering immunity has other
dangers.

> You want a species that won't cause collateral damage like the one
> sold by Ovamed. There are other clinical trials taking place using
> other species.

You cannot fiddle with the immune system without causing collateral
damage.

> It depends on the "parasite" but even thinking in terms of "parasite"
> is misleading. When the helminths are relatively harmless, you
> should think of them more as "probiotics" like the bacteria and fungi
> lining the gut.

I am in the process of rethinking probiotics. The whole
idea of "good" bacteria and "bad" bacteria is another inappropriate
intrusion of religion into medicine. Bacteria and fungi and helminths
do what they do. Whether the result is good or bad depends on
detailed circumstances and not on general principles. They may
be good in one case and bad in another.

> It's not clear that helminths can be effectively used to treat Celiac
> the way they've been useful in Crohn's however it does look likely
> that the lack of helminth infection/colonization is what leaves one
> largely vulnerable to developing an autoimmune disease in the first
> place.

<choke> Autoimmune diseases are allergies. Allergies are hard coded
in our DNA. We need to use our brain to control our environment
and stay healthy. People want to talk about the rainbow
and how God made everything perfect just for us, but they forget
the part about being kicked out of Eden and surviving by the
sweat of our brow.

We are diverging into different species. Our DNA determines that
we cannot all live in the same environment or eat the same food.
Instead of helping people to find an environment that is good for
them, you want to alter them so that they are the same. This is
invasive medicine, bad medicine. We do not understand how the
body functions well enough to make these kinds of changes.

"Above all do no harm."

> In my personal opinion, I'd expect helminths to be effective
> for Celiac at least to some extent until proven otherwise.

However you plan to introduce them, the answer is still *no*.

From: Trawley Trash on
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 04:58:47 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> Well, have a chat with God, honey. I'm autoimmune. However much I'd
> like it to go away because you don't "believe" in it, it hasn't
> happened.

Don't feel special. Everyone is autoimmune. You are the one
injecting religion into this, although you may not realize it.

When we sneeze, it is caused by immunity. If instead of a virus
causing the reaction, it is pollen; then we call it an allergy.
This is purely a semantic game.

The sneeze is caused by the immune system attacking our nasal passages:
autoimmunity. This autoimmunity has survival value because the sneeze
tends to eject whatever is there. This could be a virus or a few grains of
pepper.

> They are not lowering immunity. They are shifting it. For instance,
> if your immune system is tied up in knots because it is targeting its
> own cells with autoantibodies (anti-IL-10 antibodies in M.S. spring
> to mind), then helminths can improve immune function by putting a
> stop to that self interference. For another example, antibodies
> against GM-CSF can impair macrophage function.
>
> Suppressing autoantibody production in either of these two examples
> would "raise" immune system function, not lower it.

This is not my theory, but something that a research immunologist
explained to me about thirty-five years ago. We were both computer
geeks, and he took me out to lunch to explain how allergies work.
He was doing research on using computers to recognize cancer.
He said this is the way it is, but he did not want me to use his
name. It would have jeopardized his grants.

There is no way for our immune system to recognize "self" from "not
self", because the DNA code to specify "self" would have
to be larger than our DNA code. It would have to be larger than
itself.

> You don't understand the immune system. You're not "lowering"
> anything; you're simply shifting around various branches.
>
> Tregs - a class of cell stimulated by helminth infection - also fight
> viral infection. Actually having helminths will lower your risk for
> certain kinds of cancer by lowering your inflammation but also by
> lowering your risk of viral infection. Viruses often set off both
> autoimmune problems and cancer development.

That may be, but intestinal parasites must switch off the immune response
in the host so that they can survive. They may also do other things
as well.

> > You cannot fiddle with the immune system without causing
> > collateral damage.
>
> Which is what we did when we started clearing helminths out of the
> modern human gut and dosing ourselves with broad-spectrum
> antibiotics. Some of that might have been necessary for broad human
> health but the rest of us have to live with the negative side effects.

We fiddled with the immune system and caused collateral damage. You
did not learn the whole lesson, and you want to fiddle some more.

> If you don't want to listen to the scientific record, then fine. But
> don't accuse scientists working on the immune system of following
> your own peculiar version of "religious" dogma.

It is not my version, but their own. The flaw here is in thinking
of the body as something that was designed as opposed to evolved.
In effect this anthropomorphizes God. Even the term "immune system"
is wrong, because it implies that we understand how it all functions.
We evolved. We are not partitioned into "systems". Everything
potentially affects everything else.

> > <choke> Autoimmune diseases are allergies.
>
> No. Allegies are technically abnormal antibody responses to
> otherwise innocuous foreign material - like soy, for instance.

Soy is a recent introduction into our western diet. Many people
cannot handle it well. There is nothing abnormal about a soy
allergy.

> Autoimmunity refers (typically) to the antibody-based targeting of
> your own tissue and proteins in those tissues. Hence Celiac is an
> autoimmune disease not simply because it's a bad reaction to wheat
> but because that reaction also triggers the release of autoantibodies
> to targets like transglutaminase, a molecule necessary to the
> functioning of your body.

The immune system does not recognize our own tissue. It does not
recognize proteins either. It attaches to smaller patterns of charge
that occur within proteins. These patterns can occur in more than one
protein. So when your immune system attacks a microbe, it can also attack
your own body as well.

As my immunologist friend put it. "At an individual level it doesn't
work, but at a species level it works."

He searched for a simple example, but he could not think of one. I
suggested something from the old Mr. Magoo cartoons that he thought
was apt. If you recall, Mr. Magoo was a blind man who was the butt
of the jokes in a series of cartoons. They even had a Mr. Magoo ride
in Disneyland. But anyway there was a cartoon where someone rings
the doorbell, and Mr. Magoo turns the doorknob to go outside. But
the door is already open, and Mr. Magoo twists the postman's nose
instead.

Our immune systems as myopic as Mr. Magoo. That is the way the
immune system is. It is not perfect. It does not work very well.
It is what it is. It evolved instead of being designed.

> > Allergies are hard coded
> > in our DNA.
>
> Some are, like chitin, but most are acquired through the B cell
> antibody system.

We have codes for immunity in our DNA that are not normally switched on.
These are switched on through the B cell antibody system (sic) only
when we are exposed to the allergen (or something that looks like it
to Mr. Magoo). If all our immunity were switched on at once, we would
die from autoimmunity.

From: Trawley Trash on
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:32:59 -0600
Kofi <kofi(a)anon.un> wrote:

> > This is not my theory, but something that a research immunologist
> > explained to me about thirty-five years ago.
>
> Gee, nothing changes in thirty-five years in medicine. Nope. Not a
> thing.

What I am talking about has never been a part of medicine. We have
a cultural bias that prevents it from being seriously discussed.
Doctors do not get it, and patients do not want to hear it.