WHAT IF

[Guest guest]

What if...

It's not all about me

and my soul

and my light

and my self

What if...

My joy is in giving

My inspiration in sharing

My hope in guiding

And being part of something

Utterly outside myself

Divine love in the light of

Complete ego erasure

To celebrate my nothingness

In allowing nothing

to see everything

What if the world is my reflection

And without it

Without you

Without God

Without the consciousness of others

Without the pulse of all things outside of me

I do not exist

What if I only exist

Because you are here to observe my existence

Because I am here for Gods pleasure

Gods love, Gods light

I am not here for my own reward

I am here because you perceive that I am

And without you

My rays of light reach to nowhere

Floating endlessly

But with you

My rays of light are reflected

What if I need you

In order for me to BE

And in that realization

I have touched the hand of divinity

.....

April 12/12/09

[Guest guest]

Tommie,Thank you for this info ; a similar advice was posted a few months ago, detailing the story of a patient named Oshinsky who cured himself through pulsed doses of azythromycin.The billion-dollar question behind all this is the etiology (=cause) of asthma. Some time ago, pneumologists used to think of asthma as one disease, but could not find its cause. As time evolved, more researchers became convinced that asthma is not a disease with a single cause, and is not even one disease. They now believe that there are multiple brands of asthma, caused by a variety of factors.Of course, bacterial and viral pathogens are lung contaminants and irritants, start infections, etc, and are now recognized to contribute to asthma exacerbations. Many article are being published every year on the subject. So, sure, germs can contribute to asthma and, why not, may also cause a number of cases.Regarding chlamydia pneumoniae, it is obviously not the only nor the major cause of asthma, but it is definitely more prevalent in asthma patients, which has led a number of researchers to study the question. Notably, National Jewish in Denver is having a look.Now, should we try out this hypothesis and take Azythromycin ? The Azythromycin protocol described lasts 12 weeks and is not daily nor permanent. There is a very slight risk of creating Azythromycin resistance in the process but, as the site points out, anyone who has already tried Azythromycin without success on germs likely by now already is Azythromycin-resistant. In my opinion, no one would really have much to lose by taking a try.The following are not a detailed research on the matter but only a few recent quotes to illustrate.Pediatr Pulmonol. 2010 Jun;45(6):619-25.Viruses and atypical bacteria associated with asthma exacerbations in hospitalized children.Maffey AF, Barrero PR, Venialgo C, Fernández F, Fuse VA, Saia M, Villalba A, Fermepin MR, Teper AM, Mistchenko AS.Centro Respiratorio, Hospital de Niños " Gutiérrez," Buenos Aires, Argentina. amaffey@...AbstractOBJECTIVES AND WORKING HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the prevalence of respiratory viruses Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae and gain insight into their seasonal circulation pattern in children with acute asthma exacerbations in a temperate southern hemisphere region. STUDY DESIGN: Patients hospitalized between 3 months and 16 years of age were included in a 1-year prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Respiratory secretions were collected and the presence of different viruses and atypical bacteria analyzed by immunofluorescence and polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients (118 females) aged (mean +/- SD) 4.4 +/- 4 years were included. A potential causative agent was detected in 78% of the patients. The most frequently detected viruses were respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) (n = 85; 40%) and rhinovirus (HRV) (n = 52; 24.5%); M. pneumoniae and C. pneumoniae were detected in 4.5% and 2% of the cases, respectively. Patients with HRSV (vs. HRV) were hospitalized for a longer time (6.7 vs. 5.2 days, P = 0.012), required more days of oxygen supply (5.1 vs. 3.4, P = 0.005), had a longer duration of the exacerbation before hospitalization (3.6 vs. 1.9 days, P = 0.001) and were younger (3.7 vs. 5.1 years, P = 0.012). Three peaks of admissions were observed. A first peak (early autumn) caused by HRV, a second peak (winter) caused mainly by HRSV and a third one (spring), caused by HRSV, an increase in HMPV together with a second outbreak of HRV. CONCLUSIONS: Children with an acute asthma exacerbation presented a high prevalence of respiratory viruses. Most hospitalizations corresponded to seasonal increases in prevalence of HRV and HRSV.Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2010 Jan;10(1):67-73.Update on infection and antibiotics in asthma.Rollins DR, Beuther DA, RJ.Department of Medicine, National Jewish Health and the University of Colorado, Denver, CO 80206, USA.AbstractAsthma pathogenesis seems to be a result of a complex mixture of genetic and environmental influences. There is evidence that Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae (formerly known as Chlamydia pneumoniae) play a role in promoting airway inflammation that could contribute to the onset and clinical course of asthma. Evidence also indicates that when antimicrobial therapy can eradicate or suppress these organisms, it may be possible to alter the course of the disease. Certain macrolide antibiotics have been shown to improve control of asthma symptoms and lung function in patients diagnosed with acute C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae infection. Positive polymerase chain reaction studies for C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae are needed to select asthma patients for chronic treatment. Macrolide antibiotics may also have independent anti-inflammatory activity that may be useful in the management of asthma and other inflammatory diseases.J Asthma. 2009 Nov;46(9):967-8.Does Chlamydia pneumoniae infection trigger to development of asthma in wheezy infants?Zaitsu M.Department of Pediatrics, Saga University, 5-1-1 Nabeshima, Saga City 849-8501, Japan. zaitsum@...AbstractThe role of Chlamydia pneumonia (CP) infection in infantile asthma remains obscure. CP infection was serologically determined (Immunoglobulin M antibody titer of index (ID) > or = 2.00) in wheezing infants who were then re-examined at 3 years of age to determine whether asthma is associated with CP infection. Wheezing infants with CP infection progressed to asthma more frequently than those who were not infected. These findings may suggest that CP infection triggers the development of asthma in wheezy infants.Crit Rev Immunol. 2009;29(4):275-305.Chlamydial infection of immune cells: altered function and implications for disease.Beagley KW, Huston WM, Hansbro PM, Timms P.Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Australia. k2.beagley@...AbstractChlamydia trachomatis is an obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen that infects the genital and ocular mucosa of humans, causing infections that can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, and blinding trachoma. C. pneumoniae is a respiratory pathogen that is the cause of 12-15% of community-acquired pneumonia. Both chlamydial species were believed to be restricted to the epithelia of the genital, ocular, and respiratory mucosa; however, increasing evidence suggests that both these pathogens can be isolated from peripheral blood of both healthy individuals and patients with inflammatory conditions such as coronary artery disease and asthma. Chlamydia can also be isolated from brain tissues of patients with degenerative neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis, and also from certain lymphomas. An increasing number of in vitro studies suggest that some chlamydial species can infect immune cells, at least at low levels. These infections may alter immune cell function in a way that promotes chlamydial persistence in the host and contributes to the progression of several chronic inflammatory diseases. In this paper, we review the evidence for the growth of Chlamydia in immune cells, particularly monocytes/macrophages and dendritic cells, and describe how infection may affect the function of these cells.Indian J Med Microbiol. 2008 Oct-Dec;26(4):338-41.Chronic Chlamydia pneumoniae infection and bronchial asthma: is there a link?Agarwal A, Chander Y.Military Hospital, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. draagarwal@...AbstractPURPOSE: Besides well-defined environmental causes, accumulating evidence suggests that respiratory tract infections play an important role in the pathogenesis of asthma. Among these Chlamydia pneumoniae infection has been discussed as possibly inducing the development of asthma. METHODS: This study was designed to investigate the presence of anti chlamydial IgG, IgA, and IgM antibodies by ELISA in serum samples of 60 adults with a clinical history of asthma and 100 healthy age and sex matched controls. All the samples positive for Chlamydial genus specific IgG antibodies were then subjected to Chlamydia pneumoniae species specific IgG antibody ELISA. RESULTS: The IgG anti chlamydial antibody-positivity rate in the patients with bronchial asthma (80%) was significantly higher in all age groups than that in the healthy age and sex matched controls (59%). No significant association was observed for IgA and IgM anti chlamydial antibodies. C. pneumoniae species specific IgG antibody seroprevalence was also found to be significantly higher in all age groups in comparison to controls (61.66% vs 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Serological evidence of chronic infection with C. pneumoniae was more frequent in patients with asthma compared with control subjects. Our results support the correlation of bronchial asthma and chronic infection with C. pneumoniae in Indian population.Respir Res. 2008 May 30;9:48.Severe asthma exacerbation: role of acute Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection.Cosentini R, Tarsia P, Canetta C, Graziadei G, Brambilla AM, Aliberti S, Pappalettera M, Tantardini F, Blasi F.Emergency Medicine Department, Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Gruppo NIV Policlinico, Milan, Italy. r.cosentini@...AbstractBACKGROUND: Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae are associated with acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma (AEBA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between these acute bacterial infections and the severity of AEBA. METHODS: We prospectively analysed consecutive patients admitted to the Emergency Department with acute asthma exacerbation. In every patient peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurement was performed on admission, and spirometry during follow-up. Serology for Chlamydophila and Mycoplasma pneumoniae was performed on admission and after 4-8 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients completed the study. Acute atypical infections (AAI) was observed in 22/58 cases; we found single acute C. pneumoniae in 19 cases, single acute M. pneumoniae in 2 cases, and double acute infection in one case. Functional impairment on admission was greater in patients with AAI than in patients without AAI (PEF 205 +/- 104 L/min vs 276 +/- 117 p = 0.02) and persisted until visit 2 (FEV1% 76.30 +/- 24.54 vs FEV1% 92.91 +/- 13.89, p = 0.002). Moreover, the proportion of patients who presented with severe AEBA was significantly greater in the group with AAI than in the group without AAI (15/22 vs 12/36, p = 0.01; OR 4.29, 95% CI 1.38-13.32). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest an association between acute atypical infection and a more severe AEBA.J Asthma. 2008 Jan-Feb;45(1):39-43.Chlamydophila pneumoniae infection in adult asthmatics patients.Kocabas A, Avsar M, Hanta I, Koksal F, Kuleci S.School of Medicine, Department of Chest Diseases, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey.AbstractOBJECTIVES: This study has attempted to investigate the prevalence of Chlamydophila pneumoniae (CP) infection in patients with asthma. METHODS: A total of 84 patients with stable asthma (58 males + 26 females; mean age +/- SD; 37.3 +/- 11.0 years), 22 patients with asthma exacerbation (17 males + 5 females; mean age +/- SD; 33.2 +/- 9.1 years), and 34 healthy adults (18 males + 16 females; mean age +/- SD; 30.4 +/- 11.5 years) were included in the study. Serum and throat wash samples were obtained from all patients and healthy controls 2 times, 1 month apart. Micro Immuno Fluorescence method for detecting CP antibodies in serum, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method for detecting presence of CP infection in the throat wash samples were used. RESULTS: The frequency of PCR positivity for CP in throat wash samples was higher in the patients with stable asthma (28.6%) than in healthy control group (11.8%) (p < 0.01). However no significant difference was found between healthy control group and asthma exacerbated group (22.7%) (p > 0.05). In addition, seroprevalences of acute and chronic CP infections were not different between patient and control groups (p > 0.05). Serological acute infection for CP was not detected among patients with positive PCR results. In contrast, although not statistically significant, serologically chronic infection for CP was detected in 3 (60%) of 5 patients with asthma exacerbation, in 18 (75%) of 24 patients with stable asthma, and 2 (50%) of 4 with healthy controls (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: CP infection detected by the PCR method was more prevalent among patients with stable asthma and chronic/persistent CP infection might have an important role in asthma pathogenesis.>> Has any been to the web site ASTHMASTORY. What if the symptoms are related to a infection in the body. Infection has adverse affects on the body witch include but not limited to elevated leukotrines that have been related to asthma and runny nose etc... The asprin relation could have an effect on the amount of fatty moleclue lekotrine that is being overly produced in the body by the infection. This is just a theroy but makes more since than this syndrome that has modified it wasy into our gentic makeup to make our life a living hell. If you kill the bacteria and the body stops producing overly high amounts of leukotrines then the symptoms go away. Our problem seems to be that we muffle to symptoms without attacking the root case.>

[Guest guest]

asfyWhy do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?!? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!?! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!From: asfy <asfyso@...>Subject: Re: what ifsamters Date: Sunday, June 13, 2010, 5:45 PM

Tommie,Thank you for this info ; a similar advice was posted a few months ago, detailing the story of a patient named Oshinsky who cured himself through pulsed doses of azythromycin.The billion-dollar question behind all this is the etiology (=cause) of asthma. Some time ago, pneumologists used to think of asthma as one disease, but could not find its cause. As time evolved, more researchers became convinced that asthma is not a disease with a single cause, and is not even one disease. They now believe that there are multiple brands of asthma, caused by a variety of factors.Of course, bacterial and viral pathogens are lung contaminants and irritants, start infections, etc, and are now recognized to contribute to asthma exacerbations. Many article are being published every year on the subject. So, sure, germs can contribute to asthma and, why not, may also cause a

number of cases.Regarding chlamydia pneumoniae, it is obviously not the only nor the major cause of asthma, but it is definitely more prevalent in asthma patients, which has led a number of researchers to study the question. Notably, National Jewish in Denver is having a look.Now, should we try out this hypothesis and take Azythromycin ? The Azythromycin protocol described lasts 12 weeks and is not daily nor permanent. There is a very slight risk of creating Azythromycin resistance in the process but, as the site points out, anyone who has already tried Azythromycin without success on germs likely by now already is Azythromycin- resistant. In my opinion, no one would really have much to lose by taking a try.The following are not a detailed research on the matter but only a few recent quotes to illustrate.Pediatr Pulmonol. 2010 Jun;45(6):619- 25.Viruses and atypical bacteria associated with asthma exacerbations in hospitalized children.Maffey AF, Barrero PR, Venialgo C, Fernández F, Fuse VA, Saia M, Villalba A, Fermepin MR, Teper AM, Mistchenko AS.Centro Respiratorio, Hospital de Niños " Gutiérrez," Buenos Aires, Argentina. amaffeygmail (DOT) comAbstractOBJECTIVES AND WORKING HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the prevalence of respiratory viruses Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae and gain insight into their seasonal circulation pattern in children with acute asthma exacerbations in a temperate southern hemisphere region. STUDY DESIGN: Patients hospitalized between 3 months and 16 years of age were included in a 1-year prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Respiratory secretions were collected and the presence of different viruses and atypical bacteria analyzed by immunofluorescence and polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients (118 females) aged

(mean +/- SD) 4.4 +/- 4 years were included. A potential causative agent was detected in 78% of the patients. The most frequently detected viruses were respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) (n = 85; 40%) and rhinovirus (HRV) (n = 52; 24.5%); M. pneumoniae and C. pneumoniae were detected in 4.5% and 2% of the cases, respectively. Patients with HRSV (vs. HRV) were hospitalized for a longer time (6.7 vs. 5.2 days, P = 0.012), required more days of oxygen supply (5.1 vs. 3.4, P = 0.005), had a longer duration of the exacerbation before hospitalization (3.6 vs. 1.9 days, P = 0.001) and were younger (3.7 vs. 5.1 years, P = 0.012). Three peaks of admissions were observed. A first peak (early autumn) caused by HRV, a second peak (winter) caused mainly by HRSV and a third one (spring), caused by HRSV, an increase in HMPV together with a second outbreak of HRV. CONCLUSIONS: Children with an acute asthma exacerbation presented a high prevalence of respiratory

viruses. Most hospitalizations corresponded to seasonal increases in prevalence of HRV and HRSV.Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2010 Jan;10(1):67- 73.Update on infection and antibiotics in asthma.Rollins DR, Beuther DA, RJ.Department of Medicine, National Jewish Health and the University of Colorado, Denver, CO 80206, USA.AbstractAsthma pathogenesis seems to be a result of a complex mixture of genetic and environmental influences. There is evidence that Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae (formerly known as Chlamydia pneumoniae) play a role in promoting airway

inflammation that could contribute to the onset and clinical course of asthma. Evidence also indicates that when antimicrobial therapy can eradicate or suppress these organisms, it may be possible to alter the course of the disease. Certain macrolide antibiotics have been shown to improve control of asthma symptoms and lung function in patients diagnosed with acute C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae infection. Positive polymerase chain reaction studies for C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae are needed to select asthma patients for chronic treatment. Macrolide antibiotics may also have independent anti-inflammatory activity that may be useful in the management of asthma and other inflammatory diseases.J Asthma. 2009 Nov;46(9):967- 8.Does Chlamydia pneumoniae infection trigger to development of asthma in wheezy infants?Zaitsu M.Department of Pediatrics, Saga University, 5-1-1 Nabeshima, Saga City 849-8501, Japan. zaitsum@...- u.ac.jpAbstractThe role of Chlamydia pneumonia (CP) infection in infantile asthma remains obscure.

CP infection was serologically determined (Immunoglobulin M antibody titer of index (ID) > or = 2.00) in wheezing infants who were then re-examined at 3 years of age to determine whether asthma is associated with CP infection. Wheezing infants with CP infection progressed to asthma more frequently than those who were not infected. These findings may suggest that CP infection triggers the development of asthma in wheezy infants.Crit Rev Immunol. 2009;29(4):275- 305.Chlamydial infection of immune cells: altered function and

implications for disease.Beagley KW, Huston WM, Hansbro PM, Timms

P.Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Australia. k2.beagleyqut (DOT) edu.auAbstractChlamydia trachomatis is an obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen that infects the genital and ocular mucosa of humans, causing infections that can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, and blinding trachoma. C. pneumoniae is a respiratory pathogen that is the cause of 12-15% of community-acquired pneumonia. Both chlamydial species were believed to be restricted to the epithelia of the genital, ocular, and respiratory mucosa; however, increasing evidence suggests that both these pathogens can be isolated from peripheral blood of both healthy individuals and patients with inflammatory conditions such as coronary artery disease and

asthma. Chlamydia can also be isolated from brain tissues of patients with degenerative neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis, and also from certain lymphomas. An increasing number of in vitro studies suggest that some chlamydial species can infect immune cells, at least at low levels. These infections may alter immune cell function in a way that promotes chlamydial persistence in the host and contributes to the progression of several chronic inflammatory diseases. In this paper, we review the evidence for the growth of Chlamydia in immune cells, particularly monocytes/macrophag es and dendritic cells, and describe how infection may affect the function of these cells.Indian J Med Microbiol. 2008 Oct-Dec;26(4) :338-41.Chronic Chlamydia pneumoniae infection and bronchial asthma: is there a link?Agarwal A, Chander Y.Military Hospital, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. draagarwal@rediffma il.comAbstractPURPOSE: Besides well-defined environmental causes, accumulating evidence suggests that respiratory tract infections play an important role in the pathogenesis of asthma. Among these Chlamydia pneumoniae infection has been discussed as possibly inducing the development of asthma. METHODS: This study was designed to investigate the presence of anti chlamydial IgG, IgA, and IgM antibodies by ELISA in serum samples of 60 adults with a clinical history of asthma and 100 healthy age and sex matched controls. All the samples positive for Chlamydial genus specific IgG antibodies were then subjected to Chlamydia pneumoniae species specific IgG antibody ELISA. RESULTS: The IgG anti chlamydial antibody-positivity rate in the patients with bronchial asthma (80%) was significantly higher in all age groups than that in the healthy age and sex matched controls

(59%). No significant association was observed for IgA and IgM anti chlamydial antibodies. C. pneumoniae species specific IgG antibody seroprevalence was also found to be significantly higher in all age groups in comparison to controls (61.66% vs 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Serological evidence of chronic infection with C. pneumoniae was more frequent in patients with asthma compared with control subjects. Our results support the correlation of bronchial asthma and chronic infection with C. pneumoniae in Indian population.Respir Res. 2008 May 30;9:48.Severe asthma exacerbation: role of acute Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection.Cosentini R, Tarsia P, Canetta C, Graziadei G, Brambilla AM, Aliberti S, Pappalettera M, Tantardini F, Blasi F.Emergency Medicine Department, Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Gruppo NIV Policlinico, Milan, Italy. r.cosentini@ gmail.comAbstractBACKGROUND: Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae are associated with acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma (AEBA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between these acute bacterial infections and the severity of AEBA. METHODS: We prospectively analysed consecutive patients

admitted to the Emergency Department with acute asthma exacerbation. In every patient peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurement was performed on admission, and spirometry during follow-up. Serology for Chlamydophila and Mycoplasma pneumoniae was performed on admission and after 4-8 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients completed the study. Acute atypical infections (AAI) was observed in 22/58 cases; we found single acute C. pneumoniae in 19 cases, single acute M. pneumoniae in 2 cases, and double acute infection in one case. Functional impairment on admission was greater in patients with AAI than in patients without AAI (PEF 205 +/- 104 L/min vs 276 +/- 117 p = 0.02) and persisted until visit 2 (FEV1% 76.30 +/- 24.54 vs FEV1% 92.91 +/- 13.89, p = 0.002). Moreover, the proportion of patients who presented with severe AEBA was significantly greater in the group with AAI than in the group without AAI (15/22 vs 12/36, p = 0.01; OR 4.29, 95% CI 1.38-13.32).

CONCLUSION: Our data suggest an association between acute atypical infection and a more severe AEBA.J Asthma. 2008 Jan-Feb;45(1) :39-43.Chlamydophila pneumoniae infection in adult asthmatics patients.Kocabas A, Avsar M, Hanta I, Koksal F, Kuleci S.School of Medicine, Department of

Chest Diseases, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey.AbstractOBJECTIVES: This study has attempted to investigate the prevalence of Chlamydophila pneumoniae (CP) infection in patients with asthma. METHODS: A total of 84 patients with stable asthma (58 males + 26 females; mean age +/- SD; 37.3 +/- 11.0 years), 22 patients with asthma exacerbation (17 males + 5 females; mean age +/- SD; 33.2 +/- 9.1 years), and 34 healthy adults (18 males + 16 females; mean age +/- SD; 30.4 +/- 11.5 years) were included in the study. Serum and throat wash samples were obtained from all patients and healthy controls 2 times, 1 month apart. Micro Immuno Fluorescence method for detecting CP antibodies in serum, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method for detecting presence of CP infection in the throat wash samples were used. RESULTS: The

frequency of PCR positivity for CP in throat wash samples was higher in the patients with stable asthma (28.6%) than in healthy control group (11.8%) (p < 0.01). However no significant difference was found between healthy control group and asthma exacerbated group (22.7%) (p > 0.05). In addition, seroprevalences of acute and chronic CP infections were not different between patient and control groups (p > 0.05). Serological acute infection for CP was not detected among patients with positive PCR results. In contrast, although not statistically significant, serologically chronic infection for CP was detected in 3 (60%) of 5 patients with asthma exacerbation, in 18 (75%) of 24 patients with stable asthma, and 2 (50%) of 4 with healthy controls (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: CP infection detected by the PCR method was more prevalent among patients with stable asthma and chronic/persistent CP infection might have an important role in asthma

pathogenesis.>> Has any been to the web site ASTHMASTORY. What if the symptoms are related to a infection in the body. Infection has adverse affects on the body witch include but not limited to elevated leukotrines that have been related to asthma and runny nose etc... The asprin relation could have an effect on the amount of fatty moleclue lekotrine that is being overly produced in the body by the infection. This is just a theroy but makes more since than this syndrome that has modified it wasy into our gentic makeup to make our life a living hell. If you kill the bacteria and the body stops producing overly high amounts of leukotrines then the

symptoms go away. Our problem seems to be that we muffle to symptoms without attacking the root case.>

[Guest guest]

Hi Sergiu,

I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being

posted on this group.

I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or

whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can

offer some clarification.

The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based

medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not,

and how the understanding of Samter's evolves.

The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the

members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more

available to everyone.

I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to " some research that

said this and that " or by saying that " this has been published on PubMed, see

for yourself " .

I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what I

read every week on PubMed and medical journals.

But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more

educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices

we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise

or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.

By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on

Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent

abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think

it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct

access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.

So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue

providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free

to read them or not.

>

> asfy

>

> Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?!? Isn't it enough you

posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!?!

ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Asfy and Sergiu,

I for one really do appreciate you taking the time Asfy to post these abstracts - and I am sure the vast majority of us on here do too.

Sergiu,

while I do appreciate you dislike to seeing these abstracts, I would as a moderator on here ask you kindly to please not be so rude and shout at another member on here. I just ask that we all respect each others contributions and points of view.

Thank you and best wishes,

Becky

From: asfy <asfyso@...>samters Sent: Sun, 13 June, 2010 16:40:59Subject: Re: what if

Hi Sergiu,I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being posted on this group. I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can offer some clarification.The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not, and how the understanding of Samter's evolves. The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more available to everyone. I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to "some research that said this and that" or by saying that "this has been published on PubMed, see for yourself". I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what

I read every week on PubMed and medical journals.But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free to read them or not.>> asfy> > Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?!? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!?! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!> >

[Guest guest]

Sergiu,

I believe I can speak quite confidently on behalf of the majority of long-time members of this group when I say that the abstracts we receive from asfy are more than appreciated. Of course, as an individual member, if one does not care to read the abstracts, they can simply hit a button. The "delete" button. I also appreciate when asfy attaches the previous member posts that apply to the abstracts he shares. This saves me time from having to go back through several posts to reread member comments, questions and/or concerns.

As a member of this group, I do not feel that I get to "blast" any other member for what they write or share. The purpose of this group is to share "anything" and "everything" we feel might benefit our fellow members. We all work hard at understanding and coping with this disease.

I'm sorry Sergiu, but your message to asfy was offensive. I am happy that you have chosen to join this group and share with this group. But you will notice that this group "always" remains positive. We do our best to motivate each other to live as positively as we can with what is a very depressing disease.

Jane

From: asfy <asfyso (DOT) fr>Subject: Re: what ifsamters@groups .comDate: Sunday, June 13, 2010, 5:45 PM

Tommie,

Thank you for this info ; a similar advice was posted a few months ago, detailing the story of a patient named Oshinsky who cured himself through pulsed doses of azythromycin.

The billion-dollar question behind all this is the etiology (=cause) of asthma. Some time ago, pneumologists used to think of asthma as one disease, but could not find its cause. As time evolved, more researchers became convinced that asthma is not a disease with a single cause, and is not even one disease. They now believe that there are multiple brands of asthma, caused by a variety of factors.

Of course, bacterial and viral pathogens are lung contaminants and irritants, start infections, etc, and are now recognized to contribute to asthma exacerbations. Many article are being published every year on the subject. So, sure, germs can contribute to asthma and, why not, may also cause a number of cases.

Regarding chlamydia pneumoniae, it is obviously not the only nor the major cause of asthma, but it is definitely more prevalent in asthma patients, which has led a number of researchers to study the question. Notably, National Jewish in Denver is having a look.

Now, should we try out this hypothesis and take Azythromycin ? The Azythromycin protocol described lasts 12 weeks and is not daily nor permanent. There is a very slight risk of creating Azythromycin resistance in the process but, as the site points out, anyone who has already tried Azythromycin without success on germs likely by now already is Azythromycin- resistant. In my opinion, no one would really have much to lose by taking a try.

The following are not a detailed research on the matter but only a few recent quotes to illustrate.

Pediatr Pulmonol. 2010 Jun;45(6):619- 25.

Viruses and atypical bacteria associated with asthma exacerbations in hospitalized children.

Maffey AF, Barrero PR, Venialgo C, Fernández F, Fuse VA, Saia M, Villalba A, Fermepin MR, Teper AM, Mistchenko AS.

Centro Respiratorio, Hospital de Niños " Gutiérrez," Buenos Aires, Argentina. amaffeygmail (DOT) com

Abstract

OBJECTIVES AND WORKING HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the prevalence of respiratory viruses Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae and gain insight into their seasonal circulation pattern in children with acute asthma exacerbations in a temperate southern hemisphere region. STUDY DESIGN: Patients hospitalized between 3 months and 16 years of age were included in a 1-year prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Respiratory secretions were collected and the presence of different viruses and atypical bacteria analyzed by immunofluorescence and polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients (118 females) aged (mean +/- SD) 4.4 +/- 4 years were included. A potential causative agent was detected in 78% of the patients. The most frequently detected viruses were respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) (n = 85; 40%) and rhinovirus (HRV) (n = 52; 24.5%); M. pneumoniae and C. pneumoniae were detected in 4.5% and 2% of the cases,

respectively. Patients with HRSV (vs. HRV) were hospitalized for a longer time (6.7 vs. 5.2 days, P = 0.012), required more days of oxygen supply (5.1 vs. 3.4, P = 0.005), had a longer duration of the exacerbation before hospitalization (3.6 vs. 1.9 days, P = 0.001) and were younger (3.7 vs. 5.1 years, P = 0.012). Three peaks of admissions were observed. A first peak (early autumn) caused by HRV, a second peak (winter) caused mainly by HRSV and a third one (spring), caused by HRSV, an increase in HMPV together with a second outbreak of HRV. CONCLUSIONS: Children with an acute asthma exacerbation presented a high prevalence of respiratory viruses. Most hospitalizations corresponded to seasonal increases in prevalence of HRV and HRSV.

Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2010 Jan;10(1):67- 73.

Update on infection and antibiotics in asthma.

Rollins DR, Beuther DA, RJ.

Department of Medicine, National Jewish Health and the University of Colorado, Denver, CO 80206, USA.

Abstract

Asthma pathogenesis seems to be a result of a complex mixture of genetic and environmental influences. There is evidence that Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae (formerly known as Chlamydia pneumoniae) play a role in promoting airway inflammation that could contribute to the onset and clinical course of asthma. Evidence also indicates that when antimicrobial therapy can eradicate or suppress these organisms, it may be possible to alter the course of the disease. Certain macrolide antibiotics have been shown to improve control of asthma symptoms and lung function in patients diagnosed with acute C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae infection. Positive polymerase chain reaction studies for C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae are needed to select asthma patients for chronic treatment. Macrolide antibiotics may also have independent anti-inflammatory activity that may be useful in the management of asthma and other inflammatory diseases.

J Asthma. 2009 Nov;46(9):967- 8.

Does Chlamydia pneumoniae infection trigger to development of asthma in wheezy infants?

Zaitsu M.

Department of Pediatrics, Saga University, 5-1-1 Nabeshima, Saga City 849-8501, Japan. zaitsum@...- u.ac.jp

Abstract

The role of Chlamydia pneumonia (CP) infection in infantile asthma remains obscure. CP infection was serologically determined (Immunoglobulin M antibody titer of index (ID) > or = 2.00) in wheezing infants who were then re-examined at 3 years of age to determine whether asthma is associated with CP infection. Wheezing infants with CP infection progressed to asthma more frequently than those who were not infected. These findings may suggest that CP infection triggers the development of asthma in wheezy infants.

Crit Rev Immunol. 2009;29(4):275- 305.

Chlamydial infection of immune cells: altered function and implications for disease.

Beagley KW, Huston WM, Hansbro PM, Timms P.

Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Australia. k2.beagleyqut (DOT) edu.au

Abstract

Chlamydia trachomatis is an obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen that infects the genital and ocular mucosa of humans, causing infections that can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, and blinding trachoma. C. pneumoniae is a respiratory pathogen that is the cause of 12-15% of community-acquired pneumonia. Both chlamydial species were believed to be restricted to the epithelia of the genital, ocular, and respiratory mucosa; however, increasing evidence suggests that both these pathogens can be isolated from peripheral blood of both healthy individuals and patients with inflammatory conditions such as coronary artery disease and asthma. Chlamydia can also be isolated from brain tissues of patients with degenerative neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis, and also from certain lymphomas. An increasing number of in vitro studies suggest that some chlamydial species can infect immune cells, at least

at low levels. These infections may alter immune cell function in a way that promotes chlamydial persistence in the host and contributes to the progression of several chronic inflammatory diseases. In this paper, we review the evidence for the growth of Chlamydia in immune cells, particularly monocytes/macrophag es and dendritic cells, and describe how infection may affect the function of these cells.

Indian J Med Microbiol. 2008 Oct-Dec;26(4) :338-41.

Chronic Chlamydia pneumoniae infection and bronchial asthma: is there a link?

Agarwal A, Chander Y.

Military Hospital, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. draagarwal@rediffma il.com

Abstract

PURPOSE: Besides well-defined environmental causes, accumulating evidence suggests that respiratory tract infections play an important role in the pathogenesis of asthma. Among these Chlamydia pneumoniae infection has been discussed as possibly inducing the development of asthma. METHODS: This study was designed to investigate the presence of anti chlamydial IgG, IgA, and IgM antibodies by ELISA in serum samples of 60 adults with a clinical history of asthma and 100 healthy age and sex matched controls. All the samples positive for Chlamydial genus specific IgG antibodies were then subjected to Chlamydia pneumoniae species specific IgG antibody ELISA. RESULTS: The IgG anti chlamydial antibody-positivity rate in the patients with bronchial asthma (80%) was significantly higher in all age groups than that in the healthy age and sex matched controls (59%). No significant association was observed for IgA and IgM anti chlamydial antibodies. C. pneumoniae

species specific IgG antibody seroprevalence was also found to be significantly higher in all age groups in comparison to controls (61.66% vs 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Serological evidence of chronic infection with C. pneumoniae was more frequent in patients with asthma compared with control subjects. Our results support the correlation of bronchial asthma and chronic infection with C. pneumoniae in Indian population.

Respir Res. 2008 May 30;9:48.

Severe asthma exacerbation: role of acute Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection.

Cosentini R, Tarsia P, Canetta C, Graziadei G, Brambilla AM, Aliberti S, Pappalettera M, Tantardini F, Blasi F.

Emergency Medicine Department, Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Gruppo NIV Policlinico, Milan, Italy. r.cosentini@ gmail.com

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae are associated with acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma (AEBA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between these acute bacterial infections and the severity of AEBA. METHODS: We prospectively analysed consecutive patients admitted to the Emergency Department with acute asthma exacerbation. In every patient peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurement was performed on admission, and spirometry during follow-up. Serology for Chlamydophila and Mycoplasma pneumoniae was performed on admission and after 4-8 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients completed the study. Acute atypical infections (AAI) was observed in 22/58 cases; we found single acute C. pneumoniae in 19 cases, single acute M. pneumoniae in 2 cases, and double acute infection in one case. Functional impairment on admission was greater in patients with AAI than in patients without AAI (PEF 205 +/- 104 L/min vs 276

+/- 117 p = 0.02) and persisted until visit 2 (FEV1% 76.30 +/- 24.54 vs FEV1% 92.91 +/- 13.89, p = 0.002). Moreover, the proportion of patients who presented with severe AEBA was significantly greater in the group with AAI than in the group without AAI (15/22 vs 12/36, p = 0.01; OR 4.29, 95% CI 1.38-13.32). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest an association between acute atypical infection and a more severe AEBA.

J Asthma. 2008 Jan-Feb;45(1) :39-43.

Chlamydophila pneumoniae infection in adult asthmatics patients.

Kocabas A, Avsar M, Hanta I, Koksal F, Kuleci S.

School of Medicine, Department of Chest Diseases, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study has attempted to investigate the prevalence of Chlamydophila pneumoniae (CP) infection in patients with asthma. METHODS: A total of 84 patients with stable asthma (58 males + 26 females; mean age +/- SD; 37.3 +/- 11.0 years), 22 patients with asthma exacerbation (17 males + 5 females; mean age +/- SD; 33.2 +/- 9.1 years), and 34 healthy adults (18 males + 16 females; mean age +/- SD; 30.4 +/- 11.5 years) were included in the study. Serum and throat wash samples were obtained from all patients and healthy controls 2 times, 1 month apart. Micro Immuno Fluorescence method for detecting CP antibodies in serum, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method for detecting presence of CP infection in the throat wash samples were used. RESULTS: The frequency of PCR positivity for CP in throat wash samples was higher in the patients with stable asthma (28.6%) than in healthy control group (11.8%) (p < 0.01). However no significant

difference was found between healthy control group and asthma exacerbated group (22.7%) (p > 0.05). In addition, seroprevalences of acute and chronic CP infections were not different between patient and control groups (p > 0.05). Serological acute infection for CP was not detected among patients with positive PCR results. In contrast, although not statistically significant, serologically chronic infection for CP was detected in 3 (60%) of 5 patients with asthma exacerbation, in 18 (75%) of 24 patients with stable asthma, and 2 (50%) of 4 with healthy controls (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: CP infection detected by the PCR method was more prevalent among patients with stable asthma and chronic/persistent CP infection might have an important role in asthma pathogenesis.

>> Has any been to the web site ASTHMASTORY. What if the symptoms are related to a infection in the body. Infection has adverse affects on the body witch include but not limited to elevated leukotrines that have been related to asthma and runny nose etc... The asprin relation could have an effect on the amount of fatty moleclue lekotrine that is being overly produced in the body by the infection. This is just a theroy but makes more since than this syndrome that has modified it wasy into our gentic makeup to make our life a living hell. If you kill the bacteria and the body stops producing overly high amounts of leukotrines then the symptoms go away. Our problem seems to be that we muffle to symptoms without attacking the root case.>

[Guest guest]

Sergiu's message made me very angry. Asfy, your posts are invaluable and we owe you a debt of gratitude for the time you give to this group. I hope Sergiu's post does not affect your posting in any way -- the information you give and the abstracts you post are of great interest to many of us. I don't think we show enough appreciation and thanks.If Sergiu paid more attention to what has been posted here, he might have stayed out of the ER. (this message may be a duplicate -- first tried to post from my phone but it didn't go through.)Anyhow, asfy, I'm glad you responded as you did, and please don't stop because of one cranky member.JoanOn Jun 13, 2010, at 9:40 AM, asfy wrote:

Hi Sergiu,

I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being posted on this group.

I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can offer some clarification.

The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not, and how the understanding of Samter's evolves.

The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more available to everyone.

I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to "some research that said this and that" or by saying that "this has been published on PubMed, see for yourself".

I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what I read every week on PubMed and medical journals.

But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.

By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.

So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free to read them or not.

>

> asfy

>

> Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?!? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!?! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi allThose abstracts can be very well posted as the original link or attached in the Files section, everyone knows how to read them. But hey that's just me. I mostly say what I think, I never meant it as an attack toward asfy.I guess is due to the fact I've read abstracts all of my life.:)But I stand up for what I've said. Once it is enough. It's no need to post them more than once. It is because asfy's last post, where he deliberately copied/pasted all of the previous posted abstracts in one huge email.My 2 cents.Sergiu

[Guest guest]

Well said, Becky, Jane and Joan.

Although I haven't posted much in a long time, I'm always interested in reading Asfy's well documented posts. They really add a lot to this group. I save many of his references in a file folder.

Thanks, Asfy!

Jim (NC)

From: joan harvey <thomyris7@...>samters Sent: Sun, June 13, 2010 12:03:53 PMSubject: Re: Re: what if

Sergiu's message made me very angry. Asfy, your posts are invaluable and we owe you a debt of gratitude for the time you give to this group. I hope Sergiu's post does not affect your posting in any way -- the information you give and the abstracts you post are of great interest to many of us. I don't think we show enough appreciation and thanks. If Sergiu paid more attention to what has been posted here, he might have stayed out of the ER.

(this message may be a duplicate -- first tried to post from my phone but it didn't go through.)

Anyhow, asfy, I'm glad you responded as you did, and please don't stop because of one cranky member.

Joan

On Jun 13, 2010, at 9:40 AM, asfy wrote:

Hi Sergiu,I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being posted on this group. I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can offer some clarification.The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not, and how the understanding of Samter's evolves. The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more available to everyone. I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to "some research that said this and that" or by saying that "this has been published on PubMed, see for yourself". I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what

I read every week on PubMed and medical journals.But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free to read them or not.>> asfy> > Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?! ? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!? ! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!> >

[Guest guest]

I was just exercising my freedom of speech.I never meant it as an attack toward anyone. To all parties offended, my apologies.Sergiu

Hi Sergiu,I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being posted on this group. I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can offer some clarification.The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not, and how the understanding of Samter's evolves. The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more available to everyone. I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to "some research that said this and that" or by saying that "this has been published on PubMed, see for yourself". I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what

I read every week on PubMed and medical journals.But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free to read them or not.>> asfy> > Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?! ? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!? ! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!> >

[Guest guest]

OK, thank you for your apologies Sergiu. Hopefully this topic is done and dusted now. Quite often Asfy does post just the links. Both ways of posting these abstracts are welcomed by the vast majority of the members of this group.

As long as we respect each other on here and appreciate the contributions we all have to make and share.

Becky

From: Sergiu Labo <sergiu_labo@...>samters Sent: Sun, 13 June, 2010 17:22:37Subject: Re: Re: what if

I was just exercising my freedom of speech.I never meant it as an attack toward anyone. To all parties offended, my apologies.Sergiu

Hi Sergiu,I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being posted on this group. I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can offer some clarification.The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not, and how the understanding of Samter's evolves. The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more available to everyone. I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to "some research that said this and that" or by saying that "this has been published on PubMed, see for yourself". I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what

I read every week on PubMed and medical journals.But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free to read them or not.>> asfy> > Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?! ? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!? ! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!> >

[Guest guest]

Sergiu,

You're perfectly right that abstracts take space ; the reasons I copy/paste them

is that I believe most readers would prefer to have them directly on hand

instead of opening another window, and also because it allows me to underline

what I believe are useful quotes for those who do not want to read the entire

abstract. I know professional articles in medical journals are all written with

links instead of quotes, but I'm unfortunately not that well organized and lack

time.

The length of message is also due to the action of the " Reply " button which

copies the original message ; it helps in case the original message is old, and

it's also that I don't have enough time to erase the original part - I often

post as fast as I can, thinking something like " hey, this abstract might be of

use " and -zap- it is posted. So, yes, replies can be very long, but sorry about

that.

>

> Hi all

>

> Those abstracts can be very well posted as the original link or attached in

the Files section, everyone knows how to read them. But hey that's just me. I

mostly say what I think, I never meant it as an attack toward asfy.

> I guess is due to the fact I've read abstracts all of my life.

>

> But I stand up for what I've said. Once it is enough. It's no need to post

them more than once. It is because asfy's last post, where he deliberately

copied/pasted all of the previous posted abstracts in one huge email.

>

> My 2 cents.

>

> Sergiu

>

[Guest guest]

Asfy

I’m very happy about the abstracts and the whole stuff you have

been copying and sending. Thank you very much. I have learned a lot about

Samters from all the mails you have been sending. Thanks again…

From:

samters [mailto:samters ] On Behalf Of asfy

Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 7:42 PM

samters

Subject: Re:

Sergiu,

You're perfectly right that abstracts take space ; the reasons I copy/paste

them is that I believe most readers would prefer to have them directly on hand

instead of opening another window, and also because it allows me to underline

what I believe are useful quotes for those who do not want to read the entire

abstract. I know professional articles in medical journals are all written with

links instead of quotes, but I'm unfortunately not that well organized and lack

time.

The length of message is also due to the action of the " Reply " button

which copies the original message ; it helps in case the original message is

old, and it's also that I don't have enough time to erase the original part - I

often post as fast as I can, thinking something like " hey, this abstract

might be of use " and -zap- it is posted. So, yes, replies can be very

long, but sorry about that.

>

> Hi all

>

> Those abstracts can be very well posted as the original link or attached

in the Files section, everyone knows how to read them. But hey that's just me.

I mostly say what I think, I never meant it as an attack toward asfy.

> I guess is due to the fact I've read abstracts all of my life.

>

> But I stand up for what I've said. Once it is enough. It's no need to post

them more than once. It is because asfy's last post, where he deliberately

copied/pasted all of the previous posted abstracts in one huge email.

>

> My 2 cents.

>

> Sergiu

>

[Guest guest]

Sergiu,I for one am not very computer literate and I really appreciate Asfy and all the information he provides. I really don't know why he has upset you so much. I just hope that he will continue to provide the much needed information. I for one am thoroughly delighted that he backs up all his posts with research articles otherwise I for one would not know what to believe.Thank you Asfy I for one look forward to reading all your posts.B.From: Sergiu Labo <sergiu_labo@...>samters Sent: Sun, June 13, 2010 5:22:37 PMSubject: Re: Re: what if

I was just exercising my freedom of speech.I never meant it as an attack toward anyone. To all parties offended, my apologies.Sergiu

Hi Sergiu,I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being posted on this group. I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I can offer some clarification.The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not, and how the understanding of Samter's evolves. The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more available to everyone. I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to "some research that said this and that" or by saying that "this has been published on PubMed, see for yourself". I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what

I read every week on PubMed and medical journals.But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free to read them or not.>> asfy> > Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?! ? Isn't it enough you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!? ! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!> >

[Guest guest]

I live in a place with a really slow internet connection, so its very handy to have as much info in one email as possible, so as not to have to access the Files, which, in my case, can take forever. I think it is easy to a)not read b)delete or c) block sender if one receives forms of email one prefers not to. On Jun 13, 2010, at 10:18 AM, Sergiu Labo wrote:

Hi allThose abstracts can be very well posted as the original link or attached in the Files section, everyone knows how to read them. But hey that's just me. I mostly say what I think, I never meant it as an attack toward asfy.I guess is due to the fact I've read abstracts all of my life.:)But I stand up for what I've said. Once it is enough. It's no need to post them more than once. It is because asfy's last post, where he deliberately copied/pasted all of the previous posted abstracts in one huge email.My 2 cents.Sergiu

[Guest guest]

I for one appreciate the underlining. I don’t have time to read

the entire abstract and reading the underlined quotes are extremely useful to

me. Thank you for taking the time to do the work so many can benefit.

Amy

From:

samters [mailto:samters ] On Behalf Of asfy

Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 9:42 AM

samters

Subject: Re: what if

Sergiu,

You're perfectly right that abstracts take space ; the reasons I copy/paste

them is that I believe most readers would prefer to have them directly on hand

instead of opening another window, and also because it allows me to underline

what I believe are useful quotes for those who do not want to read the entire

abstract. I know professional articles in medical journals are all written with

links instead of quotes, but I'm unfortunately not that well organized and lack

time.

The length of message is also due to the action of the " Reply " button

which copies the original message ; it helps in case the original message is

old, and it's also that I don't have enough time to erase the original part - I

often post as fast as I can, thinking something like " hey, this abstract

might be of use " and -zap- it is posted. So, yes, replies can be very

long, but sorry about that.

>

> Hi all

>

> Those abstracts can be very well posted as the original link or attached

in the Files section, everyone knows how to read them. But hey that's just me.

I mostly say what I think, I never meant it as an attack toward asfy.

> I guess is due to the fact I've read abstracts all of my life.

>

> But I stand up for what I've said. Once it is enough. It's no need to post

them more than once. It is because asfy's last post, where he deliberately

copied/pasted all of the previous posted abstracts in one huge email.

>

> My 2 cents.

>

> Sergiu

>

[Guest guest]

As a member of this group for many, many years, I’ve come to

appreciate greatly anything that can be of help and if a person doesn’t like

the copied and pasted articles, it’s up to them whether they read them or not. 

I liken it to a television show, if you don’t like it, then just

simply turn it off.  If an article comes through that doesn’t seem useful to a

person, then after a few lines, they just delete the email.

If there’s one thing about Samters I’ve learned, it’s that this

dreaded disease affects people in different ways and to the point that even

treatment is carried out differently depending on where you live.

Cheer up, take a big breath and just enjoy what quality of life

we have in the hope something, someday will be found that can once and for all

cure Samters.

From: Sergiu Labo

[mailto:sergiu_labo@...]

Sent: Monday, 14 June 2010 12:52 AM

samters

Subject: Re: Re: what if

asfy

Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?!? Isn't it enough you

posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you made??!???!?!

ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!

From: asfy <asfyso@...>

Subject: Re: what if

samters

Date: Sunday, June 13, 2010, 5:45 PM

Tommie,

Thank you for this info ; a similar advice was posted a

few months ago, detailing the story of a patient named Oshinsky who

cured himself through pulsed doses of azythromycin.

The billion-dollar question behind all this is the

etiology (=cause) of asthma. Some time ago, pneumologists used to think of

asthma as one disease, but could not find its cause. As time evolved, more

researchers became convinced that asthma is not a disease with a single

cause, and is not even one disease. They now believe that there are multiple

brands of asthma, caused by a variety of factors.

Of course, bacterial and viral pathogens are lung contaminants

and irritants, start infections, etc, and are now recognized to contribute to

asthma exacerbations. Many article are being published every year on the

subject. So, sure, germs can contribute to asthma and, why not, may also

cause a number of cases.

Regarding chlamydia pneumoniae, it is obviously not the

only nor the major cause of asthma, but it is definitely more prevalent in

asthma patients, which has led a number of researchers to study the question.

Notably, National Jewish in Denver is having a look.

Now, should we try out this hypothesis and take

Azythromycin ? The Azythromycin protocol described lasts 12 weeks and is not

daily nor permanent. There is a very slight risk of creating Azythromycin

resistance in the process but, as the site points out, anyone who has already

tried Azythromycin without success on germs likely by now already is

Azythromycin- resistant. In my opinion, no one would really have much to lose

by taking a try.

The following are not a detailed research on the matter but

only a few recent quotes to illustrate.

Pediatr

Pulmonol. 2010 Jun;45(6):619- 25.

Viruses

and atypical bacteria associated with asthma exacerbations in hospitalized

children.

Maffey AF, Barrero PR, Venialgo C, Fernández F, Fuse VA, Saia M, Villalba A, Fermepin MR, Teper AM, Mistchenko AS.

Centro

Respiratorio, Hospital de Niños " Gutiérrez, " Buenos Aires,

Argentina. amaffeygmail (DOT) com

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

AND WORKING HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the prevalence of respiratory viruses

Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae and gain insight into

their seasonal circulation pattern in children with acute asthma

exacerbations in a temperate southern hemisphere region. STUDY DESIGN:

Patients hospitalized between 3 months and 16 years of age were included in a

1-year prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Respiratory

secretions were collected and the presence of different viruses and atypical

bacteria analyzed by immunofluorescence and polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients (118 females) aged (mean +/- SD) 4.4 +/- 4

years were included. A potential causative agent was detected in 78% of the

patients. The most frequently detected viruses were respiratory syncytial

virus (HRSV) (n = 85; 40%) and rhinovirus (HRV) (n = 52; 24.5%); M.

pneumoniae and C. pneumoniae were detected in 4.5% and 2% of the cases,

respectively. Patients with HRSV (vs. HRV) were hospitalized for a longer

time (6.7 vs. 5.2 days, P = 0.012), required more days of oxygen supply (5.1

vs. 3.4, P = 0.005), had a longer duration of the exacerbation before

hospitalization (3.6 vs. 1.9 days, P = 0.001) and were younger (3.7 vs. 5.1

years, P = 0.012). Three peaks of admissions were observed. A first peak

(early autumn) caused by HRV, a second peak (winter) caused mainly by HRSV

and a third one (spring), caused by HRSV, an increase in HMPV together with a

second outbreak of HRV. CONCLUSIONS: Children with an acute asthma

exacerbation presented a high prevalence of respiratory viruses. Most

hospitalizations corresponded to seasonal increases in prevalence of HRV and

HRSV.

Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2010

Jan;10(1):67- 73.

Update on

infection and antibiotics in asthma.

Rollins DR, Beuther DA, RJ.

Department

of Medicine, National Jewish Health and the University of Colorado, Denver,

CO 80206, USA.

Abstract

Asthma

pathogenesis seems to be a result of a complex mixture of genetic and

environmental influences. There is evidence that Mycoplasma pneumoniae and

Chlamydophila pneumoniae (formerly known as Chlamydia pneumoniae) play a role

in promoting airway inflammation that could contribute to the onset and

clinical course of asthma. Evidence also indicates that when antimicrobial

therapy can eradicate or suppress these organisms, it may be possible to

alter the course of the disease. Certain macrolide antibiotics have been

shown to improve control of asthma symptoms and lung function in patients

diagnosed with acute C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae infection. Positive

polymerase chain reaction studies for C. pneumoniae or M. pneumoniae are

needed to select asthma patients for chronic treatment. Macrolide antibiotics

may also have independent anti-inflammatory activity that may be useful in

the management of asthma and other inflammatory diseases.

J Asthma. 2009

Nov;46(9):967- 8.

Does

Chlamydia pneumoniae infection trigger to development of asthma in wheezy

infants?

Zaitsu M.

Department

of Pediatrics, Saga University, 5-1-1 Nabeshima, Saga City 849-8501, Japan.

zaitsum@...- u.ac.jp

Abstract

The role of

Chlamydia pneumonia (CP) infection in infantile asthma remains obscure. CP

infection was serologically determined (Immunoglobulin M antibody titer of

index (ID) > or = 2.00) in wheezing infants who were then re-examined at 3

years of age to determine whether asthma is associated with CP infection.

Wheezing infants with CP infection progressed to asthma more frequently than

those who were not infected. These findings may suggest that CP infection

triggers the development of asthma in wheezy infants.

Crit Rev Immunol. 2009;29(4):275- 305.

Chlamydial

infection of immune cells: altered function and implications for disease.

Beagley KW, Huston WM, Hansbro PM, Timms P.

Institute

of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology,

Australia. k2.beagleyqut (DOT) edu.au

Abstract

Chlamydia

trachomatis is an obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen that infects the

genital and ocular mucosa of humans, causing infections that can lead to

pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, and blinding trachoma. C.

pneumoniae is a respiratory pathogen that is the cause of 12-15% of

community-acquired pneumonia. Both chlamydial species were believed to be

restricted to the epithelia of the genital, ocular, and respiratory mucosa;

however, increasing evidence suggests that both these pathogens can be

isolated from peripheral blood of both healthy individuals and patients with

inflammatory conditions such as coronary artery disease and asthma. Chlamydia

can also be isolated from brain tissues of patients with degenerative

neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis,

and also from certain lymphomas. An increasing number of in vitro studies

suggest that some chlamydial species can infect immune cells, at least at low

levels. These infections may alter immune cell function in a way that

promotes chlamydial persistence in the host and contributes to the

progression of several chronic inflammatory diseases. In this paper, we

review the evidence for the growth of Chlamydia in immune cells, particularly

monocytes/macrophag es and dendritic cells, and describe how infection may

affect the function of these cells.

Indian J Med Microbiol. 2008

Oct-Dec;26(4) :338-41.

Chronic

Chlamydia pneumoniae infection and bronchial asthma: is there a link?

Agarwal A, Chander Y.

Military

Hospital, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. draagarwal@rediffma il.com

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Besides well-defined environmental causes, accumulating evidence suggests

that respiratory tract infections play an important role in the pathogenesis

of asthma. Among these Chlamydia pneumoniae infection has been discussed as

possibly inducing the development of asthma. METHODS: This study was designed

to investigate the presence of anti chlamydial IgG, IgA, and IgM antibodies

by ELISA in serum samples of 60 adults with a clinical history of asthma and

100 healthy age and sex matched controls. All the samples positive for

Chlamydial genus specific IgG antibodies were then subjected to Chlamydia

pneumoniae species specific IgG antibody ELISA. RESULTS: The IgG anti

chlamydial antibody-positivity rate in the patients with bronchial asthma

(80%) was significantly higher in all age groups than that in the healthy age

and sex matched controls (59%). No significant association was observed for

IgA and IgM anti chlamydial antibodies. C. pneumoniae species specific IgG

antibody seroprevalence was also found to be significantly higher in all age

groups in comparison to controls (61.66% vs 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Serological

evidence of chronic infection with C. pneumoniae was more frequent in

patients with asthma compared with control subjects. Our results support the

correlation of bronchial asthma and chronic infection with C. pneumoniae in

Indian population.

Respir

Res. 2008 May 30;9:48.

Severe

asthma exacerbation: role of acute Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma

pneumoniae infection.

Cosentini R, Tarsia P, Canetta C, Graziadei G, Brambilla AM, Aliberti S, Pappalettera M, Tantardini F, Blasi F.

Emergency

Medicine Department, Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico,

Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Gruppo NIV Policlinico, Milan, Italy.

r.cosentini@ gmail.com

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae are associated with acute

exacerbation of bronchial asthma (AEBA). The aim of this study was to

evaluate the correlation between these acute bacterial infections and the

severity of AEBA. METHODS: We prospectively analysed consecutive patients

admitted to the Emergency Department with acute asthma exacerbation. In every

patient peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurement was performed on admission,

and spirometry during follow-up. Serology for Chlamydophila and Mycoplasma

pneumoniae was performed on admission and after 4-8 weeks. RESULTS:

Fifty-eight patients completed the study. Acute atypical infections (AAI) was

observed in 22/58 cases; we found single acute C. pneumoniae in 19 cases,

single acute M. pneumoniae in 2 cases, and double acute infection in one

case. Functional impairment on admission was greater in patients with AAI

than in patients without AAI (PEF 205 +/- 104 L/min vs 276 +/- 117 p = 0.02)

and persisted until visit 2 (FEV1% 76.30 +/- 24.54 vs FEV1% 92.91 +/- 13.89,

p = 0.002). Moreover, the proportion of patients who presented with severe

AEBA was significantly greater in the group with AAI than in the group

without AAI (15/22 vs 12/36, p = 0.01; OR 4.29, 95% CI 1.38-13.32).

CONCLUSION: Our data suggest an association between acute atypical infection

and a more severe AEBA.

J Asthma. 2008

Jan-Feb;45(1) :39-43.

Chlamydophila

pneumoniae infection in adult asthmatics patients.

Kocabas A, Avsar M, Hanta I, Koksal F, Kuleci S.

School

of Medicine, Department of Chest Diseases, Cukurova University, Adana,

Turkey.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

This study has attempted to investigate the prevalence of Chlamydophila

pneumoniae (CP) infection in patients with asthma. METHODS: A total of 84

patients with stable asthma (58 males + 26 females; mean age +/- SD; 37.3 +/-

11.0 years), 22 patients with asthma exacerbation (17 males + 5 females; mean

age +/- SD; 33.2 +/- 9.1 years), and 34 healthy adults (18 males + 16

females; mean age +/- SD; 30.4 +/- 11.5 years) were included in the study.

Serum and throat wash samples were obtained from all patients and healthy

controls 2 times, 1 month apart. Micro Immuno Fluorescence method for

detecting CP antibodies in serum, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method

for detecting presence of CP infection in the throat wash samples were used.

RESULTS: The frequency of PCR positivity for CP in throat wash samples was

higher in the patients with stable asthma (28.6%) than in healthy control

group (11.8%) (p < 0.01). However no significant difference was found

between healthy control group and asthma exacerbated group (22.7%) (p >

0.05). In addition, seroprevalences of acute and chronic CP infections were

not different between patient and control groups (p > 0.05). Serological

acute infection for CP was not detected among patients with positive PCR

results. In contrast, although not statistically significant, serologically

chronic infection for CP was detected in 3 (60%) of 5 patients with asthma

exacerbation, in 18 (75%) of 24 patients with stable asthma, and 2 (50%) of 4

with healthy controls (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: CP infection detected by the

PCR method was more prevalent among patients with stable asthma and chronic/persistent

CP infection might have an important role in asthma pathogenesis.

>

> Has any been to the web site ASTHMASTORY. What if the symptoms are

related to a infection in the body. Infection has adverse affects on the body

witch include but not limited to elevated leukotrines that have been related

to asthma and runny nose etc... The asprin relation could have an effect on

the amount of fatty moleclue lekotrine that is being overly produced in the

body by the infection. This is just a theroy but makes more since than this

syndrome that has modified it wasy into our gentic makeup to make our life a

living hell. If you kill the bacteria and the body stops producing overly

high amounts of leukotrines then the symptoms go away. Our problem seems to

be that we muffle to symptoms without attacking the root case.

>

[Guest guest]

I for one enjoy the PubMed etc. you post here asfyso, and have

found a wealth of knowledge in many of them.

I personally would like to see your posts continued, as the ones

that don’t relate to me at the moment, may assist others.

From: asfy

[mailto:asfyso@...]

Sent: Monday, 14 June 2010 1:41 AM

samters

Subject: Re: what if

Hi Sergiu,

I understand from your message that you do not like PubMed abstracts being

posted on this group.

I have no idea whether you have a grudge against PubMed, the NIH, etc. or

whether it is just that you don't like reading abstracts in your mail, but I

can offer some clarification.

The first reason I often post abstracts is that I believe that evidence-based

medecine and research will help us by showing us what can help, what will not,

and how the understanding of Samter's evolves.

The second reason is that I believe it is a service to the majority of the

members of this group to post abstracts in order to make precise knowledge more

available to everyone.

I could easily save time and effort by simply alluding to " some research

that said this and that " or by saying that " this has been published

on PubMed, see for yourself " .

I could save even more time by not posting at all and keeping for myself what I

read every week on PubMed and medical journals.

But I will not take the easy way on this matter because I believe that the more

educated we all are as a group, the more ideas we have, and the better choices

we can make. The point of a being a group is sharing knowledge, however precise

or imprecise, and not being on our own in the whole, vast world.

By saying that, I do not mean that PubMed is the ultimate source of knowledge

on Samter's, nor on any disease, nor that I always publish the most pertinent

abstracts, nor that I am always right, far from that, etc etc - but I do think

it would be a disservice to this group to refrain from giving everyone direct

access to primary information sources so that they can see for themselves.

So, apart from periods when I have too much work to post, I plan to continue

providing general information under the form of abstracts - everyone being free

to read them or not.

>

> asfy

>

> Why do you SPAM us with your copied/paste articles?!?!? Isn't it enough

you posted them once, now you have to attach them on every post you

made??!???!?! ONCE IT IS ENOUGH!

>

>