This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

First of all I would like to thank Nigel for providing a link to a copy of Paul's paper which I have read with interest. I congratulate Paul on doing a nice summary of some of the important MS literature going back 150 years. This is somewhat deja vu for me because C. pneumone as the cause of MS burst on the scene in 1998, only 3 years after I had begun my quest to identify as many causal factors as possible.

Paul references a number of studies which found C. pneumonia in PwMS but failed to list all the studies which did not, and there are lots of them. The most convincing study that C.pneumonia is NOT a key causal factor of MS is the Munger et al, 2004 study which looked at the blood samples of people who later developed MS. It is critical to note that these samples were collectected after the time MS is established (>18) and before MS was diagnosed. To quote the authors, "Seropositivity for Cpn was not significantly associated with risk of MS". This seriously downgrades the C.pneumonia hypothesis because the cause must come before the disease.

I might also note that Paul did not address the genetics of MS and the strong HLA evidence. This also downgrades an infective hypothesis. It should also be noted that immunosuppressants have some, albeit relatively minor, benefit for MS and they should have the opposite effect if MS is primarily an infectious disease as Paul proposes. I would also mention that it appears CCSVI is relatively common (at least 10% of healthy controls) whereas MS is rare (~.1% of population). Thus only one person in 100 with CCSVI gets MS. The bottom line is CCSVI is most important for MS to happen but there are other rarer factors which are also causal factors. The evidence for EBV in MS is extremely strong. A similar Harvard study to the Munger one on C.pneumomia found that everyone who got MS had an EBV infection before diagnosis.

Of course the pediatric studies also leave little doubt that EBV is a key player in MS. I expect CCSVI is caused by a variety of factors perhaps including C.pneumone. To me all the data for MS are best explained by MS being caused by the presence of CCSVI (variety of causes and quite common) in concert with a dysregulated immune system most likely due to genetics (rare), and an EBV infection during vitamin D deficiency (common). Finally I would note the geography of MS is readily explained by vitamin D supply and genetics and in no way points to an infectious cause for MS.

Bottle-Feeding and Smoking of Banana Peel Increase Risk of Multiple Symbiosis

Mudhut, Manitoba -- April 1, 2010 -- A study published in the April 1 parchment issue of the journal Milkology shows that smoking banana peel may increase the risk of multiple symbiosis ("MS") in people who also have specific established risk factors for "MS".

The research involved 4 people with "MS" and 8 people without the disease from 3 studies: the Banana-peel Study, the Bottle-fed "MS" Study, and the Epstein-Beatle "MS" Study.

Researchers first determined whether participants had known risk factors for "MS", including having a high level of Auntie Bobbie in the blood to the Epstein-Beatle papyrus virus or having the East-LA gene, which is largely present in patients with MS.

The study found that among those with high levels of Auntie Bobbie to the Epstein-Beetle papyrus virus, banana-peel smokers were twice as likely to have "MS" as those who had never smoked the peel

The same association was not seen in those with low Auntie Bobbie levels.

The risk of "MS" associated with peel smoking was not different in people with and without the East LA gene.

"The consistency of an association between "MS", smoking peels, and Bobbie's immune response to the Epstein-Beatle papyrus virus based on these 3 distinct, pornographically diverse studies suggests this finding is not due to pants," said study author Sting, Tantric School of Pubic Health, New York. "This relationship may provide clues as to why certain individuals develop pictures while others develop "MS"."

In the United States, the average lifetime risk of developing multiple symbiosis is approximately 1 in 200 for women and 1 in 600 for men. Among those with high Auntie Bobby levels to the Epstein-Beatle papyrus virus, peel-smokers may have up to a 2-fold increase in MS risk compared with non-banana-peel-smokers.

It was also found that:

What would happen if CCSVI patients took the CAP course before the procedure.

Could this be the answer (inflammation anesthetic) for all forms of restenosis, beating it to the punch?

. . . and provide the proof as to why some do not restenose?

I took the CAP for 12 months approximately 5 years before my CCSVI procedure and as far as I know, I have not restonosed. However, neither treatments have alleviated my MS symptoms.

Did you have confirmed virus thought?

I welcome your comments Ashton. Yes ther have been just as many negative studies with Cpn as positive, but that is now also true of CCSVI. Do you dismiss CCSVI also because of the now considerable number of negative studies. About 40% of my MS patients are sero-positive for Cpn. Of those that are sero-positive and have gone onto a prolonged (6 month) course of the combined antibiotic protocol, all (only a handful so far) have become sero- negative, which to me indicates that they have had a persisting chronic infection that is now controlled. I have been impressed with the clinical results with RR MS patients having no further relapses and progressives stabilising. Some have had venoplsties as well, some haven't. The serology for Cpn unfortunately is unreliable, and MS patients who have negative serology often still benefit from the CAP.

It is likely that Cpn is therfore not the only agent that may cause this syndrome despite what Kurtzke once said -" (neurologists) are pulling the cart(the immune reaction) before the horse (infective agent), and it is likely to be just one horse rather than a herd". Genetic evidence (which isn't strong in any case) does not downgrade the infective hypothesis as there may be genetic factors which influence the susceptibilty to infection or the likelihood of an infection going on to cause the cascade of problems seen in MS.

Cpn is not showing up in 100%...it's in 40% of Dr. Thibault's MS patients. The serology is unreliable. And Dr. Thibault agrees that Cpn is not the only agent that may cause this syndrome...
We need to look at the big picture--and how the endothelium is affected by many factors.
Bacteria, viruses, lifestyle, diet, toxins, nutritional deficiencies, etc.
cheer

Surely the Lab would be able to tell him the sero-positive % of non MS patients? and I would be more interested in its effects on the MS disease and/or symptoms, rather than some random bacterial infection. All that these number4s appear to prove, are that the antibiotics work. We would already know this I would think.