In the US the FDA has been controlling the clinical trials right from the start and they (rightly) are being very cautious about this whole thing. Things would have to do a DRASTIC turnaround for the FDA to ever OK it as a supplement. Example, even though the FDA originally gave the University of Iowa the go ahead to hold clinical trials in 1999? using T suis (swine whipworm) against ulcerative colitis and Crohn's, the University of Wisconsin got a $358,000 grant from the NMSS a year or so ago to hold T suis/MS clinical trials and so far the FDA hasn't let them do it.dylan48 wrote:So are we talking a natural supplement ... or FDA approval ?
Things have already begun to snowball, regarding interest and acceptance by the medical field and I think it's going to continue at an increasing rate as some of these obscure clinical trials in other countries come to light. I don't know if they'll eventually publish the results but there is a small T suis/MS study with (last I knew) 4 or 5 people in Germany at Marburg and Charite Universities which evidently is showing good results. I should point out that the study is no placebo and is only intended to determine if clinical trials are warranted so my saying that the results have been good means absolutely nothing.How do you see it shaking out ?
The name seems a little familiar but I'm not familiar with his statement. As I mentioned earlier, this is new and there is much that isn't known. Researchers are understandably being cautious about what they say and do because their reputations are at stake.dylan48 wrote:Heard of this man ? Ethan M. Shevach, MD, Cellular Immunology Section, Laboratory of ...Cellular Immunology Section.
He had what seemed like a rather clueless statement what about the announcement from Jorge Correale, MD....something like "something must be going on" nothing like "we are well aware and monatoring"
You're talking about Joel Weinstock and that he moved to Tufts a year or so ago? If so I'm not sure what he thinks about this recent study but I imagine he's watching with interest.The board I think would be interested in anything that the UofI Doctor who did the 1999 research on parasites might be thinking since this new information came out and really Bob with your background I would appreciate it you took a look ... would it matter if I posted his name and the new university he is at now ?
Several years ago William Harnett isolated something he called ES 62 (excrete/secrete 62) which I had hoped was "the stuff" but I assume he was only able to isolate one part of it because he and other researchers continue the search for whatever it is that the helminth excrete/secrete to modulate immune systemsdylan48 wrote: Do you think it would be easier to isolate what ever it is from parasites that makes the treg cell upregulate themselves...and approving it would be a simpler/easier process because it would be a naturally occuring substance.
It's important to keep in mind that, even though it needs to be more clearly understood, the worms don't control only one aspect of the immune system and they don't just supress the immune system. It really does seem that they regulate the immune system to keep multiple levels where they need to be.Harnett W (William)
Parasite Immunol. 2007 Mar ;29 (3):127-37 17266740
Phosphorylcholine mimics the effects of ES-62 on macrophages and dendritic cells.
It's hard to say. No doubt he's heard of and read the study but he's the head of gastroenterology at Tufts and I imagine that alone keeps him busy. I'm sure he's not directly involved with the efforts to isolate what it is that the worms excrete/secrete so I don't think there's much to learn from him in that regard. I'll try to talk to one of my friends who is involved in the isolation attempt and see if she can guess how long it's going to take/how complicated this thing is.would the Dr. from Uof I have that answer ? now at Tuffs
Hi Dom,TwistedHelix wrote:I find the topic of this thread intensely interesting, so I've been doing a bit of digging of my own.
Not sure where you are heading with this? I have not had my appendix, tonsils or spleen for that matter, removed, yet I have MS, and have had EBV?TwistedHelix wrote:Hence, although it is not proven, the appendix might actually have the capacity to prevent a variety of deadly diseases by giving the body the protection it needs through the production of numerous antibodies that combat pathogens that enter the body via food consumption."
I cant remember the exact figure, but i remember hearing that if you did a count of cells in a human body, and made two counts, one for human, and the other for anything else, the odds would be 1 to 3 in the "others" favour. ie By count, we are more "other" than human. I am guessing that virus etc being so small, can hide without us noticing their prevalence. And that when you are born your white blood cells contain no DNA, but by the time you die, they are jammed with all sorts of DNA, which isnt yours.Lyon wrote:I've always found it interesting that people (myself included) are convinced that only they reside in their bodies and that their body isn't the domain of any other creature.
Or maybe the people / children that werent dying from parasite infestations were bumming out all the other numbers?Lyon wrote:Unlike our relationship with bacteria in which their loss creates a quick and noticeable problem, maybe the effects from the loss of parasites wasn't quick and obvious enough for us make the association?
Hi Cure,CureOrBust wrote:I cant remember the exact figure, but i remember hearing that if you did a count of cells in a human body, and made two counts, one for human, and the other for anything else, the odds would be 1 to 3 in the "others" favour. ie By count, we are more "other" than human. I am guessing that virus etc being so small, can hide without us noticing their prevalence. And that when you are born your white blood cells contain no DNA, but by the time you die, they are jammed with all sorts of DNA, which isnt yours.
Unlike our relationship with bacteria in which their loss creates a quick and noticeable problem, maybe the effects from the loss of parasites wasn't quick and obvious enough for us make the association?
Actually part of it involves the fact that we never really had an awareness that the parasites were dissapearing.....not that we would have shed any tears! I can see that I'm going to have to put some numbers together for you because you seem to have the idea that parasite infestation is highly fatal. Don't get me wrong, parasite infestation isn't good, but I think comparing the number of fatalities to the number of infestations in the world...especially considering that these are in the third world countries where medical care isn't available and infestations which could be controlled with medicine...aren't. I think we'd both be interested in seeing the percentage rate of death.CureOrBust wrote:Or maybe the people / children that werent dying from parasite infestations were bumming out all the other numbers?
Users browsing this forum: FishJunkie