Phage , the virus that cures

[William Gaatjes]

Not gonna even attempt to comment on the wall of text, but point out one thing. The immune avoidance mechanisms noted for CMV aren't uncommon, EBV has a few tricks as do most herpes viruses.

Given any immune defense against viruses, there's usually a viral means of avoiding it. They don't work perfectly however, or we might all be dead.

For instance, CMV has a really neat way of avoiding NK cells, so it might seem that NK cells wouldn't be effective as part of a response to CMV. However, people with defects in NK cell function tend to have much worse outcomes from CMV infections.

Oh, i agree that my post above might seem as the answer but it is not.
I do think and that is my intention is that when it comes to some of the diseases that accumulate and kill fast or kill slowly like for example cancer that the wrong combination of viruses and bacteria might be the reason or the wrong combination of bacteria and toxins or a combination of viruses , bacteria, toxins, and other pathogens like fungi, yeast...

But as you state yourself, many viruses have these tricks up their viral sleeves. Now you can imagine, that it is the consensus in the medical world that most viruses are harmless. I do think that in a solitary situation as for example lab experiments nothing will happen because of the isolated nature. But in real life, we are infected often by multiple pathogens and we carry more microbes in and on our body then we have body cells. We live in symbiosis. Now the real bad bugs are aggressive and kill humans quick. But a life long of having the wrong balance of gut microbes and living in a toxic environment and eating the wrong food. I am amazed how resilient the human body is. But i wonder if there is an epigenetic effect to be discovered here as well, that is as soon as the consensus is adjusted.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Sorry for being anal - its just a very common grammar mistake and irritates the crap out of me.

Do not worry.

Here something funny to watch 2:20 to 2:50 :
The series is great though and she is a very good comedienne...
And makes you laugh when she is laughing.
:^_^


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjJ5B7xcfbI

 

[ModestGamer]

Amazing...

That virus is scary indeed. But what worries me is there are no enforced guidelines.
I am sure that the people who work with extinct viruses or lethal ones like polio or the 1918 flu virus do not need enforced guidelines , they know how dangerous the material is they work with. What do you think about this ? Are the precautions taken really that strict ?

you think the polio virus is extinct ? Far from it.

My personal opinion is that almost all cancers must be virus related. I think that toxic materials that cause cancer, are not the primary cause, but a catalyst to jump start the process.

actually a poor immune system is the biggest offender of cancers.a healthy immune system spots and removes cancers. Odd that cancer rates sky rocket alongside immunization rates. Disturbing trend.

What was mentioned in the article was interesting :





Here are some more links about viruses and cancer. Might come in handy, however i would not be surprised you already know about them...

Cervical cancer

JC virus

Virus inside brain tumors.


EDIT : typing errors and link :

cache, main memory and mass storage



active, gene-rich and inactive, gene-poor stretches

Now does that not sound like cache, main memory and mass storage ?

Well obviously a poorly performing immune system will not catch the virus that cuases the cell mutation that leads to cancer. It is common sense.

 

[William Gaatjes]

you think the polio virus is extinct ? Far from it.

I do not think it is extinct. It is very much alive.
Life is never that easy to kill. I am sure variants of the polio virus still exist in some remote area.

actually a poor immune system is the biggest offender of cancers.a healthy immune system spots and removes cancers. Odd that cancer rates sky rocket alongside immunization rates. Disturbing trend.

What do you mean by this ? Can you clarify, please ?
This that you mention reminds me of SV40.

Well obviously a poorly performing immune system will not catch the virus that cuases the cell mutation that leads to cancer. It is common sense.

By your perspective people would either be sick forever or never sick.
It is a lot more complicated then that.

For example, a lot of "harmless" viruses are transmitted by intimate contact.
From that perspective, the best practice would be to avoid viruses transmitted through intimate contact, is to find one partner and stay with that partner for life, not even kissing. With such discipline a lot of viruses and their effects would be eradicated from a large part of humanity, but accidents will always happen. However, can you ask people such a way of life ? Even through the use of religion, people cannot be forced and will find a way and a scapegoat. People have to decide for themselves what is best.

Another example is that some pathogens have novel ways to prevent alarming the human immune system. The phrase "You do not care about what you do not know." works very well for the immune system.

 

[ModestGamer]

I do not think it is extinct. It is very much alive.
Life is never that easy to kill. I am sure variants of the polio virus still exist in some remote area.



What do you mean by this ? Can you clarify, please ?
This that you mention reminds me of SV40.



By your perspective people would either be sick forever or never sick.
It is a lot more complicated then that.

You are always technically sick. You have virus loads right now. The difference is do they overwhelm you or not ? for instance most adults today carry chicken pox. The varserillas virus. It is however inactive even though it is always there.

So how does that work again ?

there are several strains of Polio. Only one of which is paralitic and the other strains pose no more symptoms then the flu with one strain cuasing severe to mild respritory distress.

which one is extinict.

For example, a lot of "harmless" viruses are transmitted by intimate contact.
From that perspective, the best practice would be to avoid viruses transmitted through intimate contact, is to find one partner and stay with that partner for life, not even kissing. With such discipline a lot of viruses and their effects would be eradicated from a large part of humanity, but accidents will always happen. However, can you ask people such a way of life ? Even through the use of religion, people cannot be forced and will find a way and a scapegoat. People have to decide for themselves what is best.

a well practiced immune system is a healthy body. My family survived the great plague, only family in the village. Virus's are not fundementaly a bad thing. They can and do cuase positive mutation "as well as negative mutations" and also serve the pupose of trimming the herd for healthier more capable producing stock.

We are just fancy animals after all.

Another example is that some pathogens have novel ways to prevent alarming the human immune system. The phrase "You do not care about what you do not know." works very well for the immune system.

not really. we might be poisoning ourselves.

 

[Gibsons]

sigh...

I just don't have time for this.

 

[William Gaatjes]

sigh...

I just don't have time for this.

Although i do not know much about this as you do, i will give it a try.

You are always technically sick. You have virus loads right now. The difference is do they overwhelm you or not ? for instance most adults today carry chicken pox. The varserillas virus. It is however inactive even though it is always there.

So how does that work again ?

What do you think inactive means ?
You have not received an alive and healthy version of the virus. That is the whole idea. Because if you did receive a fully healthy version, you might as well have died if you did, but not necessarily.
(Was confused with small pox)

a well practiced immune system is a healthy body. My family survived the great plague, only family in the village. Virus's are not fundementaly a bad thing. They can and do cuase positive mutation "as well as negative mutations" and also serve the pupose of trimming the herd for healthier more capable producing stock.

We are just fancy animals after all.

You make the same mistake about Darwins principle of evolution as the next.
It has nothing to do with being the strongest overall. For some people in your family all the variables where right to survive. They where lucky.

For example , the physically stronger lion gets bitten by a snake. Is weakened but is not dying. Now in a fight for a troop of females he looses from a lion that is far less powerful but has the advantage of not having snake venom in his veins. And as such the weaker lion spreads his genes.
Another example is a physically stronger lion and a physically weaker lion where both get bitten by a snake. The weaker lion however has a built in advantage to recover from snake venom faster and is almost not affected. And such the physically stronger and superior lion loses from the physically weaker lion in a fight for a troop of females because in that special case the physically weaker lion had the advantage. In a normal situation he had lost.

You have a false view of supremacy and do not understand how nature works. Nature cannot be divided into separate cases.
Some real life examples :

http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/may98/niaid-06.htm

http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/07.09/CysticFibrosisG.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10013-cystic-fibrosis-gene-protects-against-tuberculosis.html

Cystic fybrosis and typhoid or or cholera tubercolosis.

A genetic mutation that protects against the disease typhoid but expected is that tubercolosis was the major contributor to the spreading of the genetic mutation..
But when you aquire this mutation from both parents, you get the very awful disease called cystic fybrosis.

Millions of people in the United States, Canada, and Europe carry a ticking time bomb in their cells -- a mutated copy of a gene known as CFTR. If both mother and father possess the mutation, each of their children has a one in four chance of dying before age 30.

A single copy of the mutated CFTR gene is present in one out of every 20 people of European origin. The 25 percent of those children who inherit two mutant copies get cystic fibrosis, a lethal disease that attacks the lungs. Until the 1950s, almost all such newborns died in early childhood.

Cystic fibrosis sufferers produce unusually salty sweat, a trait used to detect the disease. In the past, if a baby tasted salty when kissed, people knew the infant would die before its second birthday. Even today, when lung infections can be controlled with antibiotics, most victims of cystic fibrosis, 30,000 people in the United States, die before age 30.

Men with cystic fibrosis are usually sterile, and only recently have women with the disease been able to become pregnant.

This lethality and sterility present medical scientists with a mystery. Why does the mutation persist when, until quite recently, those who got the disease perished before passing it on? To survive the ruthless culling of evolution, the mutation must provide some advantage. But what is it?

Researchers at Harvard University and their colleagues at the universities of Bristol and Cambridge in England have found a likely answer.

"People with only one copy of the mutated gene apparently gain protection from infection by the bacterium that causes typhoid," says Gerald Pier, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.

Typhoid comes from eating food or drinking water contaminated with Salmonella typhi, a bacterium common in places with poor sanitation. Carried into the gut with corrupted water or food, the bug gets into the intestinal wall, then moves into the bloodstream. People with one copy of the mutated CFTR gene gain protection against such infection.

In lungs, a protein produced by the CFTR gene binds to another bacterium, usually Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and causes the germ to be expelled by coughing, sneezing, or expectoration. But cystic fibrosis patients lack this protein and thus suffer infections that clog airways and destroy lung tissue.

Sickle cell anemia.

A mutation in the production of red blood cells creates a barrier for the plasmodium parasite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Genetic_resistance_to_malaria

http://sickle.bwh.harvard.edu/malaria_sickle.html

The same type of benefit occurs in people of African descent who carry mutations in the gene responsible for making hemoglobin, a vital blood protein that carries oxygen. If genes from both parents are mutated, each offspring has a 25 percent chance of getting sickle-cell anemia, a painful, disabling disease that affects approximately 4,000 African-American babies born every year in the United States.

Those with only one mutated gene, however, gain resistance to the parasite that causes malaria. Such resistance gives blacks a big advantage in Africa, where malaria kills about one million children a year. However, this resistance is not so advantageous in this country, where the mosquito-borne disease is well controlled.

About the black death and protection against HIV1:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/previous_seasons/case_plague/index.html

http://www.wellsphere.com/hiv-aids-...r5-delta-32-in-the-european-population/439163

Recent research into the HIV pandemic has focused on the presence of individuals who do not become infected by HIV when exposed to the virus. So-called co receptors, which are essential for viral docking and infection, are thought to play a role in this immunity. One such co receptor is the protein CCR5, a chemokine receptor on the surface of T4 cells (Galvani et al.). Individuals who lack functional CCR5 protein do not become infected when exposed to HIV-1. A gene mutation, CCR5-Δ32, which causes a deletion of the allele for making CCR5, is present in about 10% of the European population (Galvani et al.). Homozygous individuals are completely immune to HIV-1 and heterozygotes while still susceptible to viral transmission, show slower progression of infection (Galvani et al.). A study done by Doctors Alison P. Galvani and. Montgomery Slatkin published in the December 9th, 2003 Proceedings of the National Academy of The Sciences in the United States, suggests that the higher rate of CCR5-Δ32 in European populations is the direct result of selection pressure caused by Small Pox epidemics.
Previous studies have tried to correlate the augmented prevalence of CCR5-Δ32 in Europe with the intense selection pressure caused by Bubonic Plague. Galvani et al. propose that a correlation between CCR5-Δ32 and Small Pox is a more likely scenario (Galvani et al.). To back this up, a population genetics model was set up using derivations of Hardy-Weinberg equations. These models assume that the CCR5-Δ32 is at least 700 years old and measure selection pressure caused by both diseases on CCR5-Δ32 since 1300 (Galvani et al.). Derivations of the Hardy-Weinberg equation, which factor in the frequency of outbreaks, percentage of mortality and age of the victims, were used to calculate the selection pressure of each disease on CCR5-Δ32. These models were used to determine whether or not each disease exerted enough selection pressure to cause 10% prevalence of CCR5-Δ32 in the European population over a 700 year period (Galvani et al.). This model shows conclusively that the Bubonic Plague did not exert enough selection pressure over 700 years to cause 10% prevalence of CCR5-Δ32 in the population while Small Pox did (Galvani et al.)..
Small Pox exerted higher selection pressure than Plague for a variety of reasons. Small Pox appeared in the population as early as 1,300 years before the first outbreak of Plague. Small Pox outbreak cycles were more frequent than Plague, correlating to a greater mortality (Galvani et al.). Finally, children, who had the greatest reproductive potential, were most susceptible to death by Small Pox while Bubonic Plague tended to eliminate people indiscriminately (Galvani et al.). All of these factors were included in the mathematical model, which showed that Small Pox was enough of a selecting force in Europe to cause the prevalence of CCR5-Δ32 to increase from 0-10% over 700 years.
There were two other pieces of evidence used by the authors to support their claim. The first came from noting that CCR5-Δ32 was present in a higher percentage of the population (14%) in Scandinavia, where Small Pox epidemics were most severe (Galvani et al.). When examined at the molecular level, the mechanism for infection by Small Pox virus involves the use of chemokine receptors, like CCR5, while Y. pestis infection in Plague is independent of these receptors (Galvani et al.).
The implications of this study on the future the HIV-1 pandemic are alarming. At least 700 years of fairly high selective pressure on a population by Small Pox conferred only 10% immunity (Galvani et al.). Since jumping species, HIV has already evolved into two subtypes, three groups and nine clades. In addition, co-infection with different clades is producing recombinant viruses, which are resistant to drug treatments and have stronger binding affinities for immune cells (Avert). HIV is evolving faster than the human race, which from a Darwinian perspective, does not bode well for our species. An interesting application of this data would be to run the same sort of population models in Africa. The selection pressure there on CCR5-Δ32 and other genes, which confer immunity to HIV, theoretically will be high. A measurement of the evolution of HIV immunity would be a helpful tool in determining the prospects for this embattled continent.

Now could you please continue this in another new thread about your genetic superiority. I try to accumulate information in this thread. Thank you.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I was wondering if the CCR5 delta 32 mutation would make people more susceptible to a genetic disease. I have not found information about that. But it seems that people who have the CCR5 delta 32 mutation are more likely to not survive an encounter with the west nile virus.

CCR5 Δ32 (delta 32) is a non-functional CCR5 receptor and is characterized by a deletion of 32 base pairs in the open reading frame. Individuals with CCR5 delta 32 have a perfectly normal phenotype except for a heightened risk of West Nile virus.

http://www.trofileassay.com/Natural_History.html

This is another example that these mutations are not steered by some intelligence. Symbolic speaking : We just run from one threat in the arms of another threat. And adjusting in the progress. This is happening all over the planet. I do not know of any life form that is able to not mutate over time.
If there is, i would gladly read about it..

 

[ModestGamer]

Although i do not know much about this as you do, i will give it a try.






What do you think inactive means ?
You have not received an alive and healthy version of the virus. That is the whole idea. Because if you did receive a fully healthy version, you might as well have died if you did, but not necessarily.
(Was confused with small pox)



You make the same mistake about Darwins principle of evolution as the next.
It has nothing to do with being the strongest overall. For some people in your family all the variables where right to survive. They where lucky.

.

First off you make a false premise about virus behavior. They are not living creatures such as bacteria. They are essentially for lack of a better term a hacking agent. a virus hacks the DNA of a host cell and then convert the host cell into a reproduction facility that creates either more DNA or cells to create more virus. They don't really do anything else. The symptomology of each virus is different to some extent but the function is all the same.

Most virus's can most likely be traced to cell mutations as a point of origin. Wiat for it the research will ferret this out.

There is no genetic superiority. Only genetic traits that allow some individuals to survive certain enviromental difference more or less sucessfully. In the case of my family it is resistance to many types of viral strains but issue with dealing with bacteria and alergens and having a hyper immune system.

sickle cell is though to provide protection against Milaria.


On the immunization front.

Why are we infecting ourselves ? Do you think those DNA/RNA fragments totally leave ? har har har they are simply incorporated into our bodys in some fashion or another only to cuase cancer or other immune system related problems later. Do you think it is coincedance that cancer rates have sky rocketed alongside immunization rates. Where is all of the genetic virus trash they are finding comming from ?

chicken pox become dormant but it can also become active later in life. shingles is the example of this. The reason it stays dormant is becuase the immune system can suppress it. However in periods of high stress or illness chickenpox can often reappear and cuase shingles or even another high level infection.

The arrogance of man is in beliving we can do anything about the situation.

Polio is a great example.

in the 1930's we ran nearly 1,000,000 cases annualy of the repritory strain. By the early 1950's the indedance rate dropped to under 50,000 annually.

there was no medical intervention no vaccines to help fight the disease.ultimately the thing that really seemed to help was the improvements in sanitation and the treating of the drinking water supply with cholrine.



So for all the hyperbole about advances in using virus's and immuniation to cure disease, it is just that. Hyperbole. If time is a test in the next 10 years we shall see a rampant increase in auto immune disease as we have been for the last 3 decades although and I will predict this based on todays data. We shall see a 10 fold increase in diabete mellitis " auto immune attack on the pancreas"

It is already happening. It is most likely being driven by the chickenpox immunizations. Which many european and canadian researchers have pointed to the chickpox virus itself being a preindicator for developing Diabete mellitis.

Your pretty ignorant on what the effect of our meddeling is.

 

[Gibsons]

First off you make a false premise about virus behavior.

Why are we infecting ourselves ? Do you think those DNA/RNA fragments totally leave ? har har har they are simply incorporated into our bodys in some fashion or another only to cuase cancer or other immune system related problems later. Do you think it is coincedance that cancer rates have sky rocketed alongside immunization rates. Where is all of the genetic virus trash they are finding comming from ?

Based on the above quote, I think you have a lot to learn about what a vaccination is or how the immune system works. Or biology in general.

I'll ask you a question or two: What "DNA/RNA fragments" are you worried about?

How are they "incorporated into our bodys in some fashion or another?" What does that even mean?

Anyway, increased cancer rates are mostly due to increased longevity. So in some sense, you're right, vaccinations have led to increased cancer rates. People are dying of cancer at age 70 instead of say, small pox at age 20.

The arrogance of man is in beliving we can do anything about the situation.

You can form an opinion on whether it's arrogant or not, but in many cases it's a fact.

 

[William Gaatjes]

First off you make a false premise about virus behavior. They are not living creatures such as bacteria. They are essentially for lack of a better term a hacking agent. a virus hacks the DNA of a host cell and then convert the host cell into a reproduction facility that creates either more DNA or cells to create more virus. They don't really do anything else. The symptomology of each virus is different to some extent but the function is all the same.

It is the combination of viruses and bacteria that is the basis of life. Viruses cannot survive in a changing environment without bacteria. Bacteria cannot survive in a changing environment without viruses. It is this basic concept that is the start for more diversity and for more complex forms. Without viruses, life would have to depend on mutagens like radiation or chemicals or heavy elements for dna changes to occur. With viruses, life has a very powerful tool to speed up evolution. I would almost admit that viruses are very elegant tools to create new forms of life.

EDIT:
Forgot to mention that this was primarily the case when life in this solar system and in particular on the planet Earth was evolving. Through evolution, many viruses where incorporated and as such a build in means of adaptation was evolved. But i have to admit this and the text above is my opinion based on some information
i found so far.
/EDIT:

Most virus's can most likely be traced to cell mutations as a point of origin. Wiat for it the research will ferret this out.

Doubt that.

There is no genetic superiority. Only genetic traits that allow some individuals to survive certain enviromental difference more or less sucessfully. In the case of my family it is resistance to many types of viral strains but issue with dealing with bacteria and alergens and having a hyper immune system.

From this i would think that you have some auto immune system issue in the family. Not to be a mean person, but as i told you before, change in one direction makes a lifeform more susceptible for a certain situation in another direction. But i am happy to read that you agree that genetic superiority only exist in one certain situation at the right place and time. And as such does not last. I would personally call this the law of evolution.

sickle cell is though to provide protection against Milaria.


On the immunization front.

Why are we infecting ourselves ? Do you think those DNA/RNA fragments totally leave ? har har har they are simply incorporated into our bodys in some fashion or another only to cuase cancer or other immune system related problems later. Do you think it is coincedance that cancer rates have sky rocketed alongside immunization rates. Where is all of the genetic virus trash they are finding comming from ?

chicken pox become dormant but it can also become active later in life. shingles is the example of this. The reason it stays dormant is becuase the immune system can suppress it. However in periods of high stress or illness chickenpox can often reappear and cuase shingles or even another high level infection.

The arrogance of man is in beliving we can do anything about the situation.

Polio is a great example.

in the 1930's we ran nearly 1,000,000 cases annualy of the repritory strain. By the early 1950's the indedance rate dropped to under 50,000 annually.

there was no medical intervention no vaccines to help fight the disease.ultimately the thing that really seemed to help was the improvements in sanitation and the treating of the drinking water supply with cholrine.



So for all the hyperbole about advances in using virus's and immuniation to cure disease, it is just that. Hyperbole. If time is a test in the next 10 years we shall see a rampant increase in auto immune disease as we have been for the last 3 decades although and I will predict this based on todays data. We shall see a 10 fold increase in diabete mellitis " auto immune attack on the pancreas"

It is already happening. It is most likely being driven by the chickenpox immunizations. Which many european and canadian researchers have pointed to the chickpox virus itself being a preindicator for developing Diabete mellitis.

Your pretty ignorant on what the effect of our meddeling is.

I am not ignorant at all. I think i know pretty much about the dangerous side effects of not having proper procedures. If you have read this thread fully, you might have read that i am very concerned about the lack of looking from different perspectives at the same time, at a certain solution used now or has been used in the past. Solutions such as genetic modifications or using vaccines while not checking what the vaccine is actually comprised of. I agree that some people have been meddling out of greed and a limited intelligence. And such is the burden of the human race. We are all doing our best to change that. The easiest change is eradication and start new. But that is against the believes of many and as such a more difficult, more labour intensive , more time consuming approach is happening. You reap what you sow or better known as karma. It is the fundamental rule, so much ignored and forgotten. But i am wondering off... :hmm:

But you make the same mistake and that is looking from one perspective at a time : Less stress, better food, more sleep, children that are fed properly and have a save place to sleep. All this affects the human body greatly. That humanity in the western world lives longer is because of common sense. Simple things we still try to deliver to other countries like clean water make an enormous amount of difference.

A few centuries ago, people in some countries in Europe realized that water makes you sick. As such, they never bathed and drank as little water as possible because they argued that not using water keeps you healthy. That is afcourse a very simple view but i do think you understand what i mean. While cooking the water or purifying it in another way makes it perfectly save to drink and use to wash with.

Life is not that simple, my friend. It is very complicated. But the more of those variables the equation of life is comprised of you can see, the more beautiful life becomes and you start to treasure it more.

EDIT:
You really need to view this, it will explain a lot :

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate.html

 

[William Gaatjes]

There is another new way discovered/identified about how viruses can be incorporated into the genome of for example mammals.

Published this week in the online journal BMC Evolutionary Biology, the paper ("Filoviruses are ancient and integrated into mammalian genomes") demonstrates for the first time that mammals have harbored filoviruses for at least tens of millions of years, in contrast to the existing estimate of a few thousand.

It suggests that these species, which maintain a filovirus infection without negative health consequences, could have selectively maintained these so-called "fossil" genes as a genetic defense.

The work has important implications for the development of potential human vaccines, as well as for the modeling of disease outbreaks and the discovery of emerging diseases, including new filoviruses.

"This paper identifies the first captured 'fossil' copies of filovirus-like genes in mammalian genomes," says Derek J. Taylor, PhD, associate professor of biological sciences in the UB College of Arts and Sciences and co-author. "Our results confirm for the first time that several groups of mammals, including groups such as marsupials that never colonized Africa, have had an association with filoviruses."

The UB co-authors say that if the rarely captured genes represent antiviral defenses or genomic scars from persistent infections, then the work opens up new possibilities for identifying reservoir species for filoviruses, which harbor the virus but remain asymptomatic.

"The reservoir for filovirus has remained a huge mystery," says Jeremy A. Bruenn, PhD, UB professor of biological sciences and co-author. "We need to identify it because once a filovirus hits humans, it can be deadly."

When the UB researchers studied samples from the fur of a wallaby at the Buffalo Zoo and a brown bat caught on the UB campus, they found that the genomes of both animals as well as some other small mammals contain "fossil" copies of the gene for these deadly viruses, and thus could be candidate reservoir species for them.

"Who knew that the bats in the attic as well as modern marsupials harbored fossil gene copies of the group of viruses that is most lethal to humans," asks Taylor.

The research also demonstrates a new mechanism by which different species of mammals can acquire genes, through non-retroviral integrated RNA viruses, which the UB scientists had previously identified in eukaryotes but was unknown in mammals.

The UB scientists note that it is well-known that RNA retroviruses, like HIV-AIDS, can be integrated into mammal genomes.

"But because filoviruses infect only the cytoplasm of cells and not the nucleus and because they have no means of making DNA copies that might be integrated into the genome -- as retroviruses do -- it was never thought gene transfer could occur between non-retroviral RNA viruses and hosts," says Bruenn. "This paper shows that it does and it may prove to be a far more general phenomenon than is currently known."

The research also reveals that existing estimates that filoviruses originated in mammals a few thousand years ago were way off the mark.

"Our findings demonstrate that filoviruses are, at a minimum, between 10 million and 24 million years old, and probably much older," says Taylor. "Instead of having evolved during the rise of agriculture, they more likely evolved during the rise of mammals."

Although this text would suggest that a complete virus is encoded into the dna of the marsupials. I do not think that it is possible for some form of coordinated gene expressions to become active and that some part or organ of the animal would start to produce a complete and functional filovirus. If it was however, we can stop watching science fiction movies. Because this would be i think the holy grail.
Another thing that i ask myself, is how does the virus get incorporated in the dna of the animal ? I think that perhaps infection of multiple viruses from different families may help. An RNA virus together with a filo virus. I do not know if that is possible though. It is just an idea.

http://www.physorg.com/news197298768.html


What are filoviruses :

Filoviruses belong to a virus family called Filoviridae and can cause severe hemorrhagic fever in humans and nonhuman primates. So far, only two members of this virus family have been identified: Marburg virus and Ebola virus. Four species of Ebola virus have been identified: Ivory Coast, Sudan, Zaire, and Reston. Ebola-Reston is the only known filovirus that does not cause severe disease in humans; however, it can be fatal in monkeys.

Structurally, filovirus virions (complete viral particles) may appear in several shapes, a biological feature called pleomorphism. These shapes include long, sometimes branched filaments, as well as shorter filaments shaped like a "6", a "U", or a circle. Viral filaments may measure up to 14,000 nanometers in length, have a uniform diameter of 80 nanometers, and are enveloped in a lipid (fatty) membrane. Each virion contains one molecule of single-stranded, negative-sense RNA. New viral particles are created by budding from the surface of their hosts’ cells; however, filovirus replication strategies are not completely understood.


It appears that filoviruses are zoonotic, that is, transmitted to humans from ongoing life cycles in animals other than humans. Despite numerous attempts to locate the natural reservoir or reservoirs of Ebola and Marburg viruses, their origins remain undetermined. However, because the virus can be replicated in some species of bats, some types of bats native to the areas where the virus is found may prove to be the viruses’ carriers.How are filoviruses spread?

In an outbreak or isolated case among humans, just how the virus is transmitted from the natural reservoir to a human is unknown. Once a human is infected, however, person-to-person transmission is the means by which further infections occur. Specifically, transmission involves close personal contact between an infected individual or their body fluids, and another person. During recorded outbreaks of hemorrhagic fever caused by filovirus infection, persons who cared for (fed, washed, medicated) or worked very closely with infected individuals were especially at risk of becoming infected themselves. Nosocomial (hospital) transmission through contact with infected body fluids – via reuse of unsterilized syringes, needles, or other medical equipment contaminated with these fluids – has also been an important factor in the spread of disease. When close contact between uninfected and infected persons is minimized, the number of new filovirus infections in humans usually declines. Although in the laboratory the viruses display some capability of infection through small-particle aerosols, airborne spread among humans has not been clearly demonstrated.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/mnpages/dispages/filoviruses.htm

 

[ModestGamer]

Based on the above quote, I think you have a lot to learn about what a vaccination is or how the immune system works. Or biology in general.

I'll ask you a question or two: What "DNA/RNA fragments" are you worried about?

How are they "incorporated into our bodys in some fashion or another?" What does that even mean?

Anyway, increased cancer rates are mostly due to increased longevity. So in some sense, you're right, vaccinations have led to increased cancer rates. People are dying of cancer at age 70 instead of say, small pox at age 20.


You can form an opinion on whether it's arrogant or not, but in many cases it's a fact.

Actually it is the common misconception about what is taught in the medical sciences field as to how virus's work that is really the key problem.

Do you know what cancer ultimately is ?

a fialure of the immune system to stop a cell that has mutated "non beneficially" from reproducing. IE cancers grow becuase the immue system cells have difficulty distingushing the difference between friend and foe. How could this have happened in a 10-12 year old child.

what would cuase the immune system in a otherwise healthy person to attacks its own body and kill the pancreas ?

MisIdentification.

Now how does that mechanism become broken. All the micro celluar issues aside.

BTW look at cancer in chlidren and people under 50 . compares those numbers to 30-40-50 years ago.

When you take a vaccination you have aquried the very illness you in fact were attempting to avoid.

 

[ModestGamer]

I am not ignorant at all. I think i know pretty much about the dangerous side effects of not having proper procedures. If you have read this thread fully, you might have read that i am very concerned about the lack of looking from different perspectives at the same time, at a certain solution used now or has been used in the past. Solutions such as genetic modifications or using vaccines while not checking what the vaccine is actually comprised of. I agree that some people have been meddling out of greed and a limited intelligence. And such is the burden of the human race. We are all doing our best to change that. The easiest change is eradication and start new. But that is against the believes of many and as such a more difficult, more labour intensive , more time consuming approach is happening. You reap what you sow or better known as karma. It is the fundamental rule, so much ignored and forgotten. But i am wondering off... :hmm:

But you make the same mistake and that is looking from one perspective at a time : Less stress, better food, more sleep, children that are fed properly and have a save place to sleep. All this affects the human body greatly. That humanity in the western world lives longer is because of common sense. Simple things we still try to deliver to other countries like clean water make an enormous amount of difference.

A few centuries ago, people in some countries in Europe realized that water makes you sick. As such, they never bathed and drank as little water as possible because they argued that not using water keeps you healthy. That is afcourse a very simple view but i do think you understand what i mean. While cooking the water or purifying it in another way makes it perfectly save to drink and use to wash with.

Life is not that simple, my friend. It is very complicated. But the more of those variables the equation of life is comprised of you can see, the more beautiful life becomes and you start to treasure it more.

EDIT:
You really need to view this, it will explain a lot :

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate.html

I disagree on that aspect. Had I taken the narrow view of health I would have concluded based on current infection rates that vaccinations provide a margin of immunity against diseases. Instead I looked at the data in its totality including data from periods of high and low disease rates and looked at things in totality. What outside factors may have influenced outbreaks and rates of infection.

The #1 factor in almost every instance is that hygene in terms of water, fleas etc is the primary indicator of overall infection rates.

If you doubt this. Look at measles in the UK. immunizations have fialed to end the infection rates. In fact the new mesales strains are resistant to immunizations if the data is correct.If the immunizations ever really had any effect anyway??? Maybe the herd gianed a natural immunity due to repeated infection that eventually became prevelant and ended the problem of infection anaywas. Measales had pretty much gone away on its own. Infections rates had dropped prior to the MMR shots and other mesales immunizations.

So on that front. If we consider all data "not data from the current age of medicine" but data from say the last 100 years versus the last say 30 we find that most of the prominent diseaes we immunize for went away without any vaccines.

BTW having had measales I will enjoy my permamnent immunity for life.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I disagree on that aspect. Had I taken the narrow view of health I would have concluded based on current infection rates that vaccinations provide a margin of immunity against diseases. Instead I looked at the data in its totality including data from periods of high and low disease rates and looked at things in totality. What outside factors may have influenced outbreaks and rates of infection.

The #1 factor in almost every instance is that hygene in terms of water, fleas etc is the primary indicator of overall infection rates.

If you doubt this. Look at measles in the UK. immunizations have fialed to end the infection rates. In fact the new mesales strains are resistant to immunizations if the data is correct.If the immunizations ever really had any effect anyway??? Maybe the herd gianed a natural immunity due to repeated infection that eventually became prevelant and ended the problem of infection anaywas. Measales had pretty much gone away on its own. Infections rates had dropped prior to the MMR shots and other mesales immunizations.

So on that front. If we consider all data "not data from the current age of medicine" but data from say the last 100 years versus the last say 30 we find that most of the prominent diseaes we immunize for went away without any vaccines.

BTW having had measales I will enjoy my permamnent immunity for life.

I give you the benefit of the doubt.
Can you explain how antibodies work for me ?
And how the immune system stores information about pathogens in the body ?
And how this affects the immunity for pathogen x version a and pathogen x version b. Same pathogen, different version.


http://www.cellsalive.com/antibody.htm

The whole problem is that you still look from one perspective.
You have to understand we are all a bit different from each other, unique.
(If humans would know this from childhood on, they maybe no longer would have the desire to differentiate themselves from others because they already are) But i am wondering of...

You have to understand we are all a bit different from each other, unique.
Because of this, pathogen a is normally not going to have much affect on person a when compared to person b or person c, etcetera. Now what the whole idea is, give the group of people a vaccination. Most will benefit, some will get sick because of a wrong reaction. At the time, people wanted to save lives, others wanted to make money so these people just accepted the risks. And your right in that way, they unknowingly steered human evolution in a certain direction. That is where you are right and i agree about meddling. But you have to understand that if nothing was done, there would have been a lot more deaths.Talking about survival of the fittest is easy until you have to helplessly witnessing how your children suffer and you have to bury your own children. This is what i mean with different perspectives. No story has 1 side.

What you probably mean is that the vaccination is contaminated with by products. This is the real issue. It is not the actual desired (for the vaccine)pathogen parts that make you sick. It is the contamination of vaccines. At page 2 of this thread, i mention the SV40 virus. You should really the read links i provided about how those polio vaccines where created and how there was one scientist (Bernice Eddy) ignored that the vaccines would be contaminated. However, the managers did not listen and millions of people got more then 40 (SV40 was number 40 identified and the list kept on growing) alive and kicking pathogens( different kind of monkey viruses) and 1 disabled and weakened polio virus. Now you could say, that we are not affected by monkey viruses. But evolution has a nasty side as well. When multiple of these viruses infect a cell and viruses that are lethal infect the same cell, the possibility arises and probability increases that a new virus will be created that will be lethal to humans. A new virus. Since we cannot scan all the cells of every individual on this planet or at least in a city, we will never know what virus is new and what virus is old. We can only assume based on indirect findings.
Remember about influenza and how pigs, chickens, ducks and humans are all infected with viruses and these viruses recombine when these animals and humans live close together ?
The 1918 infuenza epidemic ? Perhaps there is a reason why many people in the middle east do not want to eat pig meat. Because pigs are the biological equivalent of the melting oven for viruses. And the western world even has food recipes with raw or hardly cooked or baked pig meat.
How about a medium done steak where the blood still comes pouring out !
I know steak is bovine or cow meat but anyway...

It is the contamination that causes more problems then the weakened vaccination it self.
Here is a link :
http://www.sv40foundation.org/Chronology.html


The human immune system can be deadly in a few minutes if it would turn in full aggression against the human body.The human immune system is incredibly powerful. But the human immune system does not come pre-compiled with a database. The human immune system is learned what is friend and foe by chance and because of little bacteria spies that help our immune system pointing out agressive pathogens. The chance factor is greatly increased because when you are born, you get breast milk. In this breastmilk, a lot of bacteria are present you need. At the same time you get all the bacteria from your mother and father because of the cuddling and hugging and kissing. As such, your immune system is learning and gathering information while you are a little infant. You already have a large part of the bacteria that you need because you where in the womb. The placenta shields and filters a lot, but it is not perfect. If too clean means you do not have friendly bacteria on you or inside you, then too clean is not good in a world where you are surrounded with microscopic life looking for a home and food...


The friends :
In general the thymus, it is a special test system where the new cells(T-lymphocytes or T cells) of the immune system are being tested if they will recognize body cells as enemies. If so, these t-cells must be destroyed.

The friends part 2 :
You have 10 times as much bacteria living on and inside you as you have body cells. Your immune system is fighting not all these bacteria, Some (probably a pretty large part)bacteria work in a cooperative manner with your immune system. In a few posts above is solid evidence of a bacteria warning the immune system about an dangerous imposter the immune system itself can not recognize.

The friends part 3 :
These bacteria are the first line of defense , for example on your skin their exist bacteria that fight of other pathogens when your skin is damaged. And because these friendly bacteria fill up the wound, it is for the human immune system more easy to get rid of them again because these friendly bacteria are in the database of your immune system, while a new unknown pathogen would need to learned first. And learning takes time.

The human immune system acts in reality more like a balance to keep cooperative cells and cooperative bacteria at a proper level. Everything that does not cooperate must be destroyed to make sure the body as a whole is not compromised. You can understand, we really are redundantly made up of tiny little biological devices. Because everything is efficient, there is hardly any waste.

Now imagine all these little bacteria also have phages. ^_^

The foe's :
Every pathogen that wants to get inside and causes havoc in your body and distorts the balance. The Article and the video about Bonnie Bassler, explains much about quorum sensing or the molecular language between bacteria. Bacteria talk to each other. And the immune system is connected to this communication network as well.


EDIT :

Some more information about how important the right balance is between the organisms living in your gut.:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2084791

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2051807&highlight=genetics




About the placenta :
( I am not fond of using to much wikipedia but i am getting tired)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placenta#Cloaking_from_immune_system_of_mother

The placenta and fetus may be regarded as a foreign allograft inside the mother, and thus must evade from attack by the mother's immune system.For this purpose, the placenta uses several mechanisms:It secretes Neurokinin B containing phosphocholine molecules. This is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.[6]
Also, there is presence of small lymphocytic suppressor cells in the fetus that inhibit maternal cytotoxic T cells by inhibiting the response to interleukin 2.[7]
However, the placental barrier is not the sole means to evade the immune system, as foreign fetal cells also persist in the maternal circulation, on the other side of the placental barrier.[8]

And something else : epigenetics :

And a documentary about epi genetics :
I cannot find the link to the thread anymore thus i will just add it as link to google video :

A BBC horizon documentary about epi genetics :

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1128045835761675934#docid=9208477461799586076


And the deletion of the same gene on the same location of chromosome 15 causes a different disease depending if the deletion is on the dna strand from the father or on the dna strand from the mother.
It is genomic imprinting : http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/chromosome/15

Humans normally have 46 chromosomes in each cell, divided into 23 pairs. Two copies of chromosome 15, one copy inherited from each parent, form one of the pairs. Chromosome 15 spans about 100 million DNA building blocks (base pairs) and represents more than 3 percent of the total DNA in cells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelman_syndrome

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prader–Willi_syndrome

 

[William Gaatjes]

I learn every day
I was reading about the singer Sonique and read that she was ill with breast cancer in 2009. Naturally i did a quick search and i never knew this, but it seems there is a link between breast cancer and a virus found in cancerous breast tissue.

The MMTV virus is a cause of breast cancer in mice. But it seems this virus is found as well in human breast tissue that turned cancerous.

Now it may not be the sole cause, but it is interesting what the connection may be...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3879783.stm

http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/news/20061214/mouse-virus-link-breast-cancer

Tests by researchers in the United States have found signs of a virus called MMTV in tissue taken from women with the disease.
But writing in the journal Cancer, they said there were geographical variations in the numbers testing for the virus.
The UK charity Breast Cancer Care said more research is needed to determine if there is a link. Dr Paul Levine and colleagues from The George Washington University School of Public Health carried out tests on tissue samples taken from breast cancer patients in Europe, North and South America and North Africa. They found that 74% of the samples taken from patients in Tunisia showed signs of MMTV.
This study adds to existing research suggesting there may be a link between the MMTV virus and the development of breast cancer.
This compared to 42% of the samples from Australia, 38% of those from Italy, 36% of those from the United States and 31% of those from Argentina.
Tests on samples from women from Vietnam found that less than 1% showed signs of the virus.

MMTV or mouse mammary tumour virus is known to cause breast cancer in mice. Previous studies have found signs of the virus in breast cancer tissue taken from women.

The researchers said animal studies have found high levels of this virus in aggressive cancer tumours. But they said: "Whether this can be extrapolated to humans remains to be demonstrated." The researchers suggested the geographical variations may be directly related to MMTV in mice.
"The geographic differences were compatible with studies of MMTV in wild mice," they said. Helen Graham, a breast health nurse specialist at Breast Cancer Care said: "This study adds to existing research suggesting there may be a link between the MMTV virus and the development of breast cancer.
"The study had a very small sample and it is clear that more extensive research is needed into the possible link between MMTV and breast cancer.
"Many of the women Breast Cancer Care talk to are anxious to understand the causes of breast cancer but it is very important for all to remember that the single most significant risk factor for breast cancer is age. "Therefore, every woman should be breast aware throughout her adult life."

Mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV) is a milk transmitted retrovirus like the HTL viruses, HI viruses and BLV. It belongs to the genus betaretroviruses. MMTV was formerly known as Bittner virus, and previously the 'milk factor' referring to the extra-chromosomal vertical transmission of murine breast cancer by adoptive nursing, demonstrated in 1936, by Dr. John Joseph Bittner, while working at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine. Dr. Bittner, a geneticist and cancer biologist, established the theory that a cancerous agent, or "milk factor", could be transmitted by cancerous mothers to young mice from a virus in their mother's milk Medicine: Cancer Virus The majority of mammary tumors in mice are caused by mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse_mammary_tumor_virus

 

[William Gaatjes]

For those interested in music :

This is singer/DJ Sonique :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1XCBqxgak0

And the very first single :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tuQ6AkOdGY&feature=related

 

[ModestGamer]

I give you the benefit of the doubt.
Can you explain how antibodies work for me ?
And how the immune system stores information about pathogens in the body ?
And how this affects the immunity for pathogen x version a and pathogen x version b. Same pathogen, different version.


http://www.cellsalive.com/antibody.htm

The whole problem is that you still look from one perspective.
You have to understand we are all a bit different from each other, unique.
(If humans would know this from childhood on, they maybe no longer would have the desire to differentiate themselves from others because they already are) But i am wondering of...

I understand the celluar interaction issue but I lack the communication skills to effectively describe what I take in. It is a disability and a very anoying one.

Anyways to adress your points.

The very systems you describe later in your post about the immune systm are interesting in 2 facets.

1. We bypass those response mechanisms by introvenously injecting "anti bodies" which is a misnomer.

Vaccine delibrately give a person a infection, typically with a non human genome parent cell. This almost always creates a massive response as a forgien cell. Now similar things do occur with normal infection but the vaccine itself is not even the same disease we are immunizing for.

Virus + host cell equals different disease. IE a human polio cell is genetically different then a monkey polio cell. So even IF we can avoid complications from the delibrate infection by the virus,what we are immunizing for is already genetically different from the human version. In fact all the human versions while relatively similar are different due to the fact that the Host DNA in some fashion is retained by the virus to help it disguise itself from the immune system in a virus infection.

So the very premise of the vaccine is False on its face.

2. I am not worried about the contimination so much as the fact that we have no way to prove IF vaccines are effective.

IE if you look at comparative data and set aside medical research. Infections come and go.

There was a great case in ohion some 3 years agoe where 400 kids got measales. Upon investigation all 4000 young adults had not only been properly immunized but had had the needed boosters as well.

So obviously when 100% of the infected population is immunized. It speas volumes about the effectiveness of the immunizations on its face.

BTW the data for that infection group has been curiously removed from the FDA website. I don't know why.

3. Immunizations will not work for a substantial portion of the population. due to genetic variances vaccines may only be effective in at best 10% of the population.

Thanx to the wonderful genetic manipulation of virus's every infectee creates a new strain of the virus simply by becoming infected.

4. We are learning more about virus's. This will hopefully change the future of how these vaccines are developed. Maybe they will become effective.

Just a foot note.

Polio was generally transmitted by water in swimming pools and misquitos.

 

[ModestGamer]

Cancer in and of itself is a virus by the best definition.

I learn every day
I was reading about the singer Sonique and read that she was ill with breast cancer in 2009. Naturally i did a quick search and i never knew this, but it seems there is a link between breast cancer and a virus found in cancerous breast tissue.

The MMTV virus is a cause of breast cancer in mice. But it seems this virus is found as well in human breast tissue that turned cancerous.

Now it may not be the sole cause, but it is interesting what the connection may be...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3879783.stm

http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/news/20061214/mouse-virus-link-breast-cancer





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse_mammary_tumor_virus

 

[William Gaatjes]

Cancer in and of itself is a virus by the best definition.

I do not know if that is the case.

But i do know that viruses are the reason why we exist.

I mean, if you want to make a sterile environment, that is fine. But then you first have to completely change how the human body works. Because we are part of our environment and our environment is part of us. And when you succed you still have to create defenses against bacteria.

 

[ModestGamer]

I do not know if that is the case.

But i do know that viruses are the reason why we exist.

I mean, if you want to make a sterile environment, that is fine. But then you first have to completely change how the human body works. Because we are part of our environment and our environment is part of us. And when you succed you still have to create defenses against bacteria.

I don't worry about it. They come and they go regardless of what we do. We can take some commons sense steps to reduce deaths and infections but beyond that. We are at the planets mercy.

do you know how few people died of polio vs the total number of infections.

about as bad as the flu in reality.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I understand the celluar interaction issue but I lack the communication skills to effectively describe what I take in. It is a disability and a very anoying one.

Anyways to adress your points.

The very systems you describe later in your post about the immune systm are interesting in 2 facets.

1. We bypass those response mechanisms by introvenously injecting "anti bodies" which is a misnomer.

Vaccine delibrately give a person a infection, typically with a non human genome parent cell. This almost always creates a massive response as a forgien cell. Now similar things do occur with normal infection but the vaccine itself is not even the same disease we are immunizing for.

Virus + host cell equals different disease. IE a human polio cell is genetically different then a monkey polio cell. So even IF we can avoid complications from the delibrate infection by the virus,what we are immunizing for is already genetically different from the human version. In fact all the human versions while relatively similar are different due to the fact that the Host DNA in some fashion is retained by the virus to help it disguise itself from the immune system in a virus infection.

So the very premise of the vaccine is False on its face.

2. I am not worried about the contimination so much as the fact that we have no way to prove IF vaccines are effective.

IE if you look at comparative data and set aside medical research. Infections come and go.

There was a great case in ohion some 3 years agoe where 400 kids got measales. Upon investigation all 4000 young adults had not only been properly immunized but had had the needed boosters as well.

So obviously when 100% of the infected population is immunized. It speas volumes about the effectiveness of the immunizations on its face.

BTW the data for that infection group has been curiously removed from the FDA website. I don't know why.

3. Immunizations will not work for a substantial portion of the population. due to genetic variances vaccines may only be effective in at best 10% of the population.

Thanx to the wonderful genetic manipulation of virus's every infectee creates a new strain of the virus simply by becoming infected.

4. We are learning more about virus's. This will hopefully change the future of how these vaccines are developed. Maybe they will become effective.

Just a foot note.

Polio was generally transmitted by water in swimming pools and misquitos.

The FDA has some strange behaviour sometimes. I do not think the FDA is fully independent.
And i do think sometimes people have been used as guinea pigs.

There is a theory for example that multiple scleroses originated from biological experiments in the USSR. But i do not know to believe that. This man claimed he created a disease by manipulating dna from viruses and bacteria that is exactly the same as MS. The rabbits that where used as test subjects got a fewer first and a few days later these rabbits where healthy. But a few weeks later the rabbits started to behave strange. The rabbits acquired an auto immune disease that affected the myelin sheats of the nerves... The name of the doctor is Sergei Popov. I do not know if it is true though...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bioterror/biow_popov.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AX67YtDjPms
And a 50 minuted documentary where Sergei Popov speaks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpz-f-DgDK4&feature=related





I agree that we could not give the human polio virus at the time in the 19 century. But with todays technology we can actually learn our immune system about specific virus proteins. The only problem is that before we can do such a thing, we must perform the same function as the thymus does. And that is to check if this is not a body protein because then we might create an auto immune disease. Now most proteins are encased in lipids when they travel around in the bloodstream because other wise the immune systems assume these as hostile, if i am not mistaken. Perhaps Gibsons can explain it better if he has the time...

But what do you think then what has happened during the first vaccination that started all this :Edward Jenner was the first to use the vaccination technique because he noticed the girls who took care of the cows did not get sick.

Jenner worked in a rural community and most of his patients were farmers or worked on farms with cattle. In the 18th century smallpox was a very common disease and was a major cause of death. The main treatment was by a method which had brought success to a Dutch physiologist Jan Ingenhaus and was brought to England in 1721 from Turkey by Lady Mary Wortly Montague. This method involved inoculating healthy people with substances from the pustules of those who had a mild case of the disease, but this often had fatal results.In 1788 an epidemic of smallpox hit Gloucestershire and during this outbreak Jenner observed that those of his patients who worked with cattle and had come in contact with the much milder disease called cowpox never came down with smallpox. Jenner needed a way of showing that his theory actually worked.Jenner was given the opportunity on the 14 May 1796, when a young milkmaid called Sarah Nelmes came to see him with sores on her hands like blisters. Jenner identified that she had caught cowpox from the cows she handled each day.
Jenner now had the opportunity to obtain the material try out his theories. He carefully extracted some liquid from her sores and then took some liquid from the sores of a patient with mild smallpox.
Jenner believed that if he could inject someone with cowpox, the germs from the cowpox would make the body able to defend itself against the dangerous smallpox germs which he would inject later.
Jenner approached a local farmer called Phipps and asked him if he could inoculate his son James against smallpox. He explained to the farmer that if his theory was correct, James would never contract smallpox. Surprisingly, the farmer agreed.Jenner made two small cuts on James's left arm. He then poured the liquid from Sarah's cowpox sores into the open wounds which he bandaged.James went down with cowpox but was not very ill. Six weeks later when James had recovered, Jenner vaccinated him again, this time with the smallpox virus.This was an extremely dangerous experiment. If James lived Jenner would have found a way of preventing smallpox. If James developed smallpox and died he would be a murderer.To Jenner's relief James did not catch smallpox. His experiment had worked.In 1798 after carrying out further successful tests, he published his findings: An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae, a Disease Known by the Name of Cow Pox. Jenner called his idea " vaccination" from the word vaccinia which is latin for cowpox. Jenner also introduced the term virus.Jenner found a great deal of scepticism to his ideas and was subject to much ridicule. A cartoon was drawn, showing cows coming out of various parts of people's bodies after they had been vaccinated with cowpox.

After this he used it on many people who did not die. I do think vaccination is not a bad method. But it all depends on what is being used.


http://www.zephyrus.co.uk/edwardjenner.html

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

I agree that we could not give the human polio virus at the time in the 19 century. But with todays technology we can actually learn our immune system about specific virus proteins. The only problem is that before we can do such a thing, we must perform the same function as the thymus does. And that is to check if this is not a body protein because then we might create an auto immune disease. Now most proteins are encased in lipids when they travel around in the bloodstream because other wise the immune systems assume these as hostile, if i am not mistaken. Perhaps Gibsons can explain it better if he has the time...

That is not true. The lymphocytes that make up the body's cell-mediated immunity do not inherently recognize the difference between self and non-self antigens. Though lymphocytes recognize only peptides, the body does not need lipids to disguise the presence of proteins. Instead, all the lymphocytes that could possibly be activated by self antigens in the body are screened during maturation by the bone marrow and thymus, and destroyed.

Also, as far as I know there is no effective way to teach the immune system to recognize a new antigen. Unless the genotype HLA complement of an individual were missing a combination that allowed a certain lymphocyte to bind said antigen with any affinity, there is no point - the body can already do this on its own. Vaccines and inoculation do not enhance this, they simply prepare the body for the reinfection with this virus by causing an immune response, which in turn causes the production of memory lymphocytes that can produce a much quicker secondary response in the case of reinfection.

 

[ModestGamer]

That is not true. The lymphocytes that make up the body's cell-mediated immunity do not inherently recognize the difference between self and non-self antigens. Though lymphocytes recognize only peptides, the body does not need lipids to disguise the presence of proteins. Instead, all the lymphocytes that could possibly be activated by self antigens in the body are screened during maturation by the bone marrow and thymus, and destroyed.

Also, as far as I know there is no effective way to teach the immune system to recognize a new antigen. Unless the genotype HLA complement of an individual were missing a combination that allowed a certain lymphocyte to bind said antigen with any affinity, there is no point - the body can already do this on its own. Vaccines and inoculation do not enhance this, they simply prepare the body for the reinfection with this virus by causing an immune response, which in turn causes the production of memory lymphocytes that can produce a much quicker secondary response in the case of reinfection.

Thanx you so much for explianing what I was trying to get at.

When you get a vaccine fo say measales. We are giving Measales to the person being vaccinated. givin that the virus is genetically altered it no longer represents the actual virus in the wild. Ergo the vaccine will not be effective.

BTW getting the mseaes is a 100% effective guarentee against reinfection. Given the data on the measales vaccine that I have seen on and off over the years. the vaccine does not work with modern strains.

Also measales just isn't that bad. Really no worse then chicken pox excpet for the high fever. Which if left alone poses no significant threat. Mot of the complications with measales are cuaed by overly aggresive treatment altering the normal path of the bodys immune response.

 

[William Gaatjes]

That is not true. The lymphocytes that make up the body's cell-mediated immunity do not inherently recognize the difference between self and non-self antigens. Though lymphocytes recognize only peptides, the body does not need lipids to disguise the presence of proteins. Instead, all the lymphocytes that could possibly be activated by self antigens in the body are screened during maturation by the bone marrow and thymus, and destroyed.

Also, as far as I know there is no effective way to teach the immune system to recognize a new antigen. Unless the genotype HLA complement of an individual were missing a combination that allowed a certain lymphocyte to bind said antigen with any affinity, there is no point - the body can already do this on its own. Vaccines and inoculation do not enhance this, they simply prepare the body for the reinfection with this virus by causing an immune response, which in turn causes the production of memory lymphocytes that can produce a much quicker secondary response in the case of reinfection.

I am bit weary. How do auto immune diseases start then ?
I for example learned from a colleague that he acquired diabetes after he had a virus infection which then caused his immune system to attack the islets of Langerhans. My memory is failing on me because i vaguely remember that someone in Canada who had diabetes had an experimental treatment, where his bone marrow was destroyed. And when he had his transplant, the memory of his immune system was erased and he no longer had diabetes. The same version of diabetes my colleague has.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islets_of_Langerhans

If he is in, i will ask about it tomorrow.

I think it where the measles , what he aquired. After that he became a diabetic type 1. I will verify it when he is in.

There is some mention about this virus :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coxsackie_B4_virus