Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: thought this might be good to repost

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

this last part is very interesting.

These findings suggest that a primary " danger signal " (Matzinger, 2002) might

reprogram a host's innate immune system and render it sensitive to secondary

signals by a toxicant. We hypothesized that macrophages might be critical

targets for reprogramming of the innate immune system to a toxicant-sensitive

state. The goal of this research was to test this hypothesis by determining (1)

if LPS priming via TLR4 in vitro can sensitize macrophages to DON-induced

proinflammatory gene expression, (2) whether other TLR agonists are capable of

priming the macrophage response to DON, and (3) whether LPS priming of

macrophages enhances their responsiveness to other toxicants known to induce

proinflammatory gene expression. The results suggest that priming of macrophages

via multiple TLRs increases their sensitivity to induction of inflammatory gene

expression by DON and that, in an analogous fashion, LPS priming via TLR4

increases sensitivity to other toxicants with diverse mechanisms of action.

sounds like a chemical sensitivity reaction minus the brain effects from passage

through the BBB or up the nose to the brain.

interesting, immune system might reprogram itself to render it sensitive to " a

toxicant " that would mean any toxicant, not a sub-set of a certain toxicant, not

one certain toxicant but any toxicant capable of warning the body of danger.

this would bring up the fact that dose is very, very, important.

>

> Toll-Like Receptor Priming Sensitizes Macrophages to Proinflammatory Cytokine

Gene Induction by Deoxynivalenol and Other Toxicants

> full text 2006/cited

> http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/92/2/445

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, at the risk of getting yelled at :) I'm just going to throw this out here.

keep in mind that I am in no way a immuologest, just did alot of research on the

immune system after I got somewhat of a understanding on anatomy. could have

been my brain disfunctions but there just seemed to be a lot of things regarding

the immune system that just didn't jive and oh so many different views, jikes.

anyway, when I came across this, I just felt somethings started makeing more

sence to me.

makes me thing about Dr.Phil saying " and hows that working for you "

a different view of how the immune system might function.

purhapes PRRs have not evolved to bind to pathogens at all.

perhaps the pathogens have evolved to bind to them for their own benifit.

THE DANGER MODEL:RENEWED SENCE OF SELF/Polly Matzinger

http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/ImmunologyGeneral/DangerModel.pdf

Polly Matzinger

http://cmmg.biosci.wayne.edu/asg/polly.html

http://users.telenet.be/nmertens/U11/IM2_immunology.htm

immunology,danger signal

Heat shock proteins form part of a danger signal cascade in response to

lipopolysaccharide and GroEL.

Collect - Hide Abstract + View Abstract

An increasing number of cell types, including peripheral blood mononuclear cells

(PBMCs), have been demonstrated to release heat shock proteins (Hsps). In this

paper we investigate further the hypothesis that Hsps are danger signals. PBMCs

and Jurkat cells released Hsp70 (0.22 and 0.7 ng/10(6) cells, respectively) into

medium over 24 h at 37 degrees C. Release of Hsp70 was stimulated 10-fold by

GroEL (P < 0.001) and more than threefold by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (P <

0.001). Although Hsp60 could be detected in the medium of cells cultured at 37

degrees C for 24 h, the low rates of release were due probably to cell damage.

Significant release of Hsp60 was observed when Jurkat cells were exposed to

GroEL (2.88 ng/10(6) cells) or LPS (1.40 ng/10(6) cells). The data are

consistent with the hypothesis that Hsp70 and Hsp60 are part of a danger

signalling cascade in response to bacterial infection.

Davies EL, Bacelar MM, Marshall MJ, E, Wardle TD, SM, and

JH

Clinical and experimental immunology 145(1):183, 2006 Jul - Who cited this? |

PubMed ID: 16792689 | Fulltext

http://www.labmeeting.com/paper/558479/davies-2006-heat-shock-proteins-form-part\

-of-a-danger-signal-cascade-in-response-to-lipopolysaccharide-and-groel

Sensing danger--Hsp72 and HMGB1 as candidate signals. - cite this + cite

this

Collect - Hide Abstract + View Abstract

Molecules that behave as danger signals are produced when the body is perceived

to be under attack, and they alert the immune system to the problem. The immune

system can then mount an appropriate response. Two molecules that have received

attention as potential danger signals are heat shock protein 72 (Hsp72) and high

mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), which are intracellular proteins but are released

when cells are under stress, in particular, when necrosis occurs. This review

considers the similarities between these two molecules and then contrasts their

mechanism of action and problems that can arise when they are overpresented in

the extracellular environment. It is proposed that Hsp72 and HMGB1 are members

of a suite of danger molecules that provide a fingerprint of the threat, or

stressor, to tissue or organism integrity.

JH and Ireland HE

Journal of leukocyte biology 83(3):489-92, 2008 Mar - Who cited this? | PubMed

ID: 18156188 | Fulltext

Hsp70 release from peripheral blood mononuclear cells. - cite this + cite

this

Collect - Hide Abstract + View Abstract

There are an increasing number of studies reporting the presence of Hsps in

human serum. We have investigated the release of Hsp70 into blood and culture

medium from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), and whether this release

is due to cell damage or active secretion from the cells. Intact Hsp70 was

released from cells within whole blood and from purified PBMCs under normal

culture conditions. Hsp70 release was rapid (0.1 ng/10(6) cells/h) over the

first 2 h of culture and continued at a reduced rate up to 24 h (<0.025 ng/10(6)

cells/h). Using viable cell counts and lactate dehydrogenase release we were

able to confirm that the release of Hsp70 was not due to cellular damage. Hsp70

release was inhibited by monensin, methyl-beta-cyclodextrin, and methylamine,

but not by brefeldin A. These data suggest that Hsp70 is released from cells via

a non-classical pathway, possibly involving lysosomal lipid rafts.

Hunter-Lavin C, Davies EL, Bacelar MM, Marshall MJ, SM, and JH

Biochemical and biophysical research communications 324(2):511-7, 2004 Nov 12 -

Who cited this? | PubMed ID: 15474457 | Fulltext

------------------

> >

> > Toll-Like Receptor Priming Sensitizes Macrophages to Proinflammatory

Cytokine Gene Induction by Deoxynivalenol and Other Toxicants

> > full text 2006/cited

> > http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/92/2/445

> >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one reason this just nailed it for me was because I spent a hudge amount of time

researching apoptosis vs. necrosis and over and over again necrosis, even

through all the disputes, stood out as what was happening as a result of

something toxic affecting our bodies, a unnatural cell death. it about drove me

nuts,lol's, I had to put it aside but I was convienced that necrosis not

apoptosis was a result of toxin exposure.

but thats not the only reason,it just all makes sence to me, and haveing spent

that much time reading about the immune system, and to read this paper and

suddenly it's all clicks like that, I just loved it.

>

> well, at the risk of getting yelled at :) I'm just going to throw this out

here. keep in mind that I am in no way a immuologest, just did alot of research

on the immune system after I got somewhat of a understanding on anatomy. could

have been my brain disfunctions but there just seemed to be a lot of things

regarding the immune system that just didn't jive and oh so many different

views, jikes.

> anyway, when I came across this, I just felt somethings started makeing more

sence to me.

> makes me thing about Dr.Phil saying " and hows that working for you "

>

> a different view of how the immune system might function.

>

> purhapes PRRs have not evolved to bind to pathogens at all.

> perhaps the pathogens have evolved to bind to them for their own benifit.

>

> THE DANGER MODEL:RENEWED SENCE OF SELF/Polly Matzinger

> http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/ImmunologyGeneral/DangerModel.pdf

>

> Polly Matzinger

> http://cmmg.biosci.wayne.edu/asg/polly.html

> http://users.telenet.be/nmertens/U11/IM2_immunology.htm

> immunology,danger signal

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and no, I'm not saying apoptosis is not also accuring. just that it may be

accuring for other reasons.

>

> one reason this just nailed it for me was because I spent a hudge amount of

time researching apoptosis vs. necrosis and over and over again necrosis, even

through all the disputes, stood out as what was happening as a result of

something toxic affecting our bodies, a unnatural cell death. it about drove me

nuts,lol's, I had to put it aside but I was convienced that necrosis not

apoptosis was a result of toxin exposure.

> but thats not the only reason,it just all makes sence to me, and haveing spent

that much time reading about the immune system, and to read this paper and

suddenly it's all clicks like that, I just loved it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...