Questions on Immunity & auto-immunity?
in [Immunology]
|
From: kumar on 16 Nov 2005 23:42 Hello, What tells us pathologically, whether we are immuno-deficient or immuno-strong? Are healthy or weak RBCs, WBCs related to it? Can circulating old senile worn out cells trigger auto-immune response? I am asking these questions in view of following notes as given in one book relating to some alt. system. One healing agent's physico-chemical reactions indicates:- "It(healing agent) destroys old-senile worn out cells, esp. RBCs, WBCs and macrophases in the liver by taking away their water. Therefore, its defficiency results into excessive useless circulating, wandering cells in blood vessels and causes spherocytosis. Cells are enlarged but with poor performance. They block capilalary ends and cause local ischemic and necrotic changes. Its defficiency causes sepretion of old cells from growing tissues. They circulate in the body and become antigenic in nature. Thus the body produces auto-immune bodies against these cells. Therefore, it is usful in auto-immune disorders.." Two more agents indicate physico-chemical reactions : "It increases bone-marrow activity to produce more RBCs, WBCs and platelets." "Defecsive action: Initially it decreases phagocytosis followed by increase in phagocytosis, by an increase in the nuclear maturity of neutrophils and macrophases. Thus, it protects against pus producing bacterials.. " how can my previous mentionings be relavant to following consideration? " Cytokines Cytokines (pronounced "sigh-toe-kines") are hormones made by immune system cells. They have a crucial role in regulating the growth and activity of other immune system cells and blood cells. At the present time, the main use of cytokines in cancer treatment is to lessen the side effects of other treatments such as chemotherapy. Manmade versions of cytokines can help the bone marrow make more white blood cells, red blood cells, or platelets when the levels in the body have become too low. While this is important, it isn't truly immunotherapy. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/co...p?sitearea=ETO " Best wishes.
From: montygram on 17 Nov 2005 00:12 Kumar: You ask good questions, but judging from your past remarks, you need to start thinking "outside the box." Biology is basically not a science, in that the scientific method is only employed when conventient. Most of biology is based upon observations, or worse, things like "associational markers" and "surrogate endpoints." You doctor can order tests, then tell you what the "markers" are "associated" with, but few have even a basic understanding of the molecular/cellular level mechanisms involved. Based upon my research and experience, it is clear that the whole notion of an "immune system" needs to be reconsidered. In particular, expeiments should be done on animals fed the usual "control diets," which are high in omega 6 PUFAs, and on another group which is given a diet that minimizes free radical insults while optimizing cellular respiration. They should be allowed to make their own PUFAs, the Mead acid. The difference in "immune response" is incredible. Without omega 6 PUFAs overloading your body, you will not have to worry about "auto-immune" diseases, but you also won't have to worry about "getting sick," because pathogens won't be able to do much in your body, and you won't feel much in the way of symptoms, because they come from arachidonic acid being released by PLA2. If you feel more comfortable remaining in your biology textbook "matrix," I understand, but all you will learn is how people whose bodies are overloaded with omega 6 PUFAs react to certain kinds of insults. EM Berry wrote about this explicitly several years ago, for example. Until experments that control for all the factors that are relevant are performed, you are just studying the epiphenomena of omega 6 PUFA overload, not "biology" or "medicine," at least in a way that follows the scientific method. But I extend a open hand to you. If you want to know something specific, just ask. But remember that much is not known, mainly because funding of basic science, such as what Gilbert Ling has devoted his life to, is currently out of favor. Instead, the "hot property" is to develop drugs as "therapy" - not cures. Fortunately, there is enough evidence to know what to avoid, especially in the dietary context. I only request that you ask yourself, "suppose the way most of our experts are thinking about this is deeply flawed?"
From: kumar on 17 Nov 2005 01:05 montygram, Many thanks. I just see inorganic/mineral/salt part on our physiology & healings. I am interested in knowing:- Whether above coditions as developed by indicated physico-chemical reactions are aeitology of understanding weakening or strengthning of immune responces? Whether imbalances in Calcium, sulphur, phosphate & Silicon(in form of Cal.sulphate, Cal.phosphate & Silicic acid) can be relevant to all these effects?
From: montygram on 17 Nov 2005 02:17 There are all kinds of possibilities. You can search pubmed.com for calcium immune and see what comes up, but this may not be the root cause. For example, stressed cells release calcium. You just want to avoid all stressors, and most people don't realize that the highly unsaturted oils and oxidized cholesterol are powerful stressors. The "immune system" gets very complicated once you go beyond the basics, but my point is that you don't have to go beyond the basics. Eat good quality protein and a few other things while avoiding the stressor foods, and you don't need to worry too much about all the technicalities, which have not been worked out yet.
From: Doug Freese on 17 Nov 2005 06:13
"montygram" <nazztrader(a)lycos.com> wrote in message news:1132204325.664643.195430(a)o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > Kumar: > > You ask good questions, but judging from your past remarks, you need > to > start thinking "outside the box." Biology is basically not a science, > in that the scientific method is only employed when conventient. I'd be careful of anything he says that follows. Monty still believes the Eath is flat. -DF |