MS not an autoimmune disease

If it's on your mind and it has to do with multiple sclerosis in any way, post it here.

MS not an autoimmune disease

Postby finn » Sat Mar 20, 2004 6:11 am

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:40 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

I questioned my neuro about this...

Postby VirtuallyFine » Sat Mar 20, 2004 8:20 am

I was excited to see this as well, so I talked to my neuro about this...although this report is new, the findings are not. My neuro says that John Prineas is a highly respected pathologist who has been working on MS for "eons". HOWEVER...no reason to not stay excited...any and all ongoing research is great...my only concern is chasing after a holy grail that does not exist...resources are limited for research, so I like to see well founded reasons for spending / using these resources.

NOTE: I am NOT a skeptic - I entertain every option ~ I am a realist however who knows that our resources need practical application...

thanks Finn!
< March 20, 2004 = I want my life back *sigh*
> March 20, 2004 = ...day one on alertec = getting my life back? *grin*
User avatar
VirtuallyFine
Family Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Canada

Postby finn » Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:28 am

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby Shayk » Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:26 pm

Virtually Fine--so happy to see your new fatigue meds are doing their thing! :)

Finn--Saturday night beer sounds great but I'm allergic to it so can't join you. :( Welcome to this site. :)

Since I can't have a beer, I'm going to enjoy wild speculation as tho I've had several tho.... :roll:

You all know my focus has been on the sex hormones and MS. Today I read that estrogen raises the serotonin and endorphin levels. Maybe similar to LDN?

Even tho I haven't posted on the estriol thread like I said I would. Here are some interesting quotes from various medical abstracts...

"several studies suggest that sex steroids influence the development and severity of MS........oral contraceptives containing female sex steroids have been associated with a lower risk of developing MS and decreased disability."

Haven't gotten the full article yet, but it's entitled: Sex steroid regulation of microglical cellactivation: relevance to MS, Ann N Y Acad. Sci. Dec. 2003 329-34 by PD Drew, et al.

Another interesting association "Estrogen receptor alpha, not beta, is a critical link in estradiol-mediated protection against brain injury." Last line of abstract "Our discovery that ER alpha mediates protection of the brain carries far-reaching implications for the selective targeting of ERs in the treatment and prevention of neural dysfunctions associated with normal aging or brain injury."

Ref. Poc. Natl Acad Sci USA Feb. 13, 2001, 1952-7.
Seems to me MS brains are injured somehow, someway :roll:

Well, enough. Something of a summary on Hormones and MS can be found at:

www.msrc.co.uk/index.cfm?fuseaction=show&pageid=972

Have a nice week end all and enjoy your beer!

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby finn » Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:51 am

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:42 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby Shayk » Sun Mar 21, 2004 8:30 am

You are absolutely right Finn :)

I didn't (and don't) know if the research on hormones was based on the autoimmune theory or not, so thought it offered another avenue for discussion of "not autoimmune". :oops:

Thanks for the link and your English is great.

Have a great day :)

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby finn » Tue Mar 23, 2004 6:31 am

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby Shayk » Tue Mar 23, 2004 8:09 pm

Finn, you are so good and yippee I get to go to Paris :D Thanks! You're way ahead of me on this. :)

I'll try to stick to the thread :) I can tell you that probably because I'm so new to MS, I didn't find the research findings that MS may not be an autoimmune disease all that surprising.

Because it's all so new to me and I know so little, I'd already thought to myself, "What's wrong with this picture?" I answered myself by thinking "There's something fundamentally wrong with some basic assumption(s) about MS because it's just too weird to have so little progress for so long."

That thought is actually one, but not the main reason that I started to and keep pursuing information on MS and hormones. I'll try to explain and hope you're smiling :) :lol:

One of the basic things that it seems there is some general agreement about with MS is that it strikes women much more frequently than men and that generally speaking, there is a tendency for men to experience more progressive forms of the disease.

Quite honestly, it continues to be beyond my comprehension that researchers have probably known about these ( ? other) gender differences for many years, but as far as I can tell, MS researchers for the most part have basically ignored doing a lot of research on one of the most fundamental factors that differentiates genders, i.e. hormones.

We say in the US, "What's up with that?" Is this one of those basic pieces that in my mind might be missing? Of course, I have no idea. Could be though.

8O I actually saw an online story today that depending on one's interpretation reinforces the research that MS is not an autoimmune disorder and at the same time reinforces the need for research on hormones. In this case, the stress hormone cortisol.

Quoting: "The negative effects of stress on exacerbation of multiple sclerosis are at least as great as the positive effects of a class of drugs widely considered to produce clinically meaningful results", Mohr and colleagues write in the March 20 issue of the British Medical Journal. "We hope these findings will open investigation into new avenues of managing multiple sclerosis, either through stress management or through pharmacological management of potential (hormonal) or immune responses to stress."

That leads to my other basic reaction to MS may not be an autoimmune disorder. That is, as suggested in your post, it encourages some creative geniuses who haven't been able to pursue their ideas to come forth and we'll all have answers before we know it. :)

Sorry about the length. I think your English is better than mine by the way.

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby finn » Wed Mar 24, 2004 12:30 pm

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby Shayk » Thu Mar 25, 2004 9:00 pm

:)

Finn you are just so articulate :!:

I haven't seen any comments from the MS community about this topic, but then again I wouldn't even know where to look for them. :lol:

No, I don't think the hormones are the cause of MS. But because I'm a newbie and know so little at this point, I can completely jump out of the "autoimmune" box and wonder if it's a disorder of the endocrine system that manifests itself neurologically. Now, if only my legs would allow me to jump we'd be onto something! :) Could be another tree to bark up tho. :wink:

I'm still dumbfounded by the similarities of information about MS and hormones. A couple of quotes from the basic hormone book I've read (which never mentions MS).

"When progesterone is metabolized, it binds with GABA receptors in your brain. GABA is an amino acid that acts as a neurotransmitter". I think I remember reading something recently about a Copaxone study suggesting that part of it's activity might be a neuroprotective property related to GABA.

Another quote (same book) was almost haunting for me: "DHEA and cortisol work together to help you respond to stress....Cortisol helps your body to protect itself from itself..."

Enough of that :) . Is there an easy way for you to explain why you think this research gets us closer to the cause of MS? (Remember I'm at square one here) :lol:

As a newbie, I still have a basic question, could this particular research that MS is not an autoimmune disorder help explain why it's been so difficiult to correlate the number size and location of brain lesions with prognosis?

I'm glad you don't mind long posts and I hope someone will let us know what the MS Community is saying about this research. I'd love to know.

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby finn » Sun Mar 28, 2004 11:02 am

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:44 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby Shayk » Tue Mar 30, 2004 8:47 pm

Finn

You really are an expert in all of this. I am so impressed and don't know what to say, except that I agree wholeheartedly that what the theory is doesn't matter as long as we get therapy that works.

I know nothing about that stem cell stuff or the antibodies, but my rose colored glasses are turning dark red :lol: :lol: on the endocrine possibilites.

Sticking with "if MS is not an autoimmune disorder", and, could it be endocrine, I have to post these two quotes, "coincidental" information I saw today.

from an article on "Licorice Root May Keep Mental Skills Sharp"

"Researchers say previous human and animal studies have shown that differences in cognitive function can be attributed to differences in long-term exposure to hormones produced by the adrenal glands, such as cortisol." MS has a cognitive component for sure. :roll:

From an article on inhaled steroids and bone loss, "However for decades it's been known that the pill form of corticosteroids or steroids for short, mimic the naturally produced hormone cortisol, which helps regulate blood sugar and metabolism." Jeez, I just finished oral steroids and MS and fatigue? :roll:

But, back to one of your original questions, have you or has anyone else heard what the MS community has to say about MS not being autoimmune?

Take care and I hope you are well!

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby Shayk » Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:38 pm

I'm :lol: because I'm replying to my own post again :roll:

Finn, I think there is finally some commentary from the MS Community about the research from Australia that it is not an autoimmune disease.

I saw that the Annals of Neurology, Vol. 55, Issue 4, Pages 455-457, (published online 22 Mar 2004) has an editorial entitled:

Pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis: The eyes only see what the mind is prepared to comprehend by Bruce Trapp, PhD of the Department of Neurosciences Lerner Research Institute Cleveland Clinic Foundation.

I believe this same journal has an article from the Australian researchers that MS is not autoimmune. The Cleveland Clinic is generally held in high regard in the US I think.

Unfortunately :( I couldn't access the editorial. If you see the editorial or any discussion of it, would you let us know?

Even if I can eventually access it I don't think I'd understand it nearly as well as you. :)

Thanks Finn! Hope you are well!

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby finn » Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:30 am

Sorry, time to leave the board.

-finn
Last edited by finn on Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby Shayk » Wed Apr 07, 2004 5:34 pm

Hey Finn :) guess what, I got it.

A colleague was gracious enough to get me a copy of the editorial from the Annals of Neurology, Vol. 55, No. 4 April 2004 by Dr. Trapp of the Cleveland Clinic, entitled Pathogenesis of Multiple Sclerosis: The Eyes Only See What the Mind is Prepared to Comprehend. It is commentary on the research of Barnett and Prineas.

Selected quotes and perhaps out of context (since in fact I don’t really understand the details of the science involved :roll: ) that I found interesting are:

“….the mechanism by which the immune system is “tricked” into seeing myelin as foreign in MS patients has eluded the MS community. In fact, it is so elusive that the topic is rarely discussed.”

“Why then have we had such difficulty in identifying the causative agent in MS? Is it possible that the immune response in MS is secondary to a primary disease mechanism? The article by Barnett and Prineas in this issue of Annals raises this possibility.”

“This view of MS lesion formation proposes apoptotic oligodendrocyte death as the primary cause of inflammation in the MS brain…There appears to be little doubt that oligodendrocyte death is preceding inflammation in their lesions.”

“If the apoptotic hypothesis is correct, it will be important to determine if oligodendrocyte death is a cell autonomous event or driven by an external signal.”

“The MS community has tried for decades to fit MS into the experimental allergic encephalomyelitis box and when all is said and done, it just does not fit.”…..”It is time to ask ourselves if modeling all aspects of MS after EAE is justified or prudent.”

“Even if Barnett and Prineas are correct……an even more important issue is whether inflammatory demyelination is central to the pathogenesis of MS or is part of a cascade of adaptive immune responses that evolved as a critical component of tissue repair. There is a true missing link in our understanding of MS and we must be open to surprises.”

Although at one point the editorial does seem to question if the lesions examined in the research were representative of “pathogenic mechanisms that occur in MS patients with a more typical disease course,” it seems to me the editorial is basically telling researchers to open their eyes.

Let me know what you think. I think it’s great they didn’t totally diss it.

And, to everyone who may read this, the entire editorial is over 2 pages, so these quotes are "out of context".

Sharon
User avatar
Shayk
Family Elder
 
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 4:00 pm

Next

Return to General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service