Actually, I'm not sure that you realize just how accurate you might be on this one Cure!CureOrBust wrote:Wouldn't bob at this point say they would no longer have MS if they were truly infected?from 12 helminth-infected MS patients
oooooo... Big call! So obviously I missed the published peer reviewed article stating that. And so did my neuro.Lyon wrote:The genetic predisposition for MS has been there through human history and MS incidence only required the necessary environmental conditions, which were met by situations brought about by the industrial revolution.
Remind me again of the ratio of autoimmune sufferers as compared to people free of autoimmune conditions. I think the "natural tendency" would go to the higher number. Or am I just not seeing something you are.Lyon wrote:In other words, I think it might be accurate to consider the human system as one which has a natural tendency towards autoimmunity in the absence of the parasites which we humans host in our natural state.
Other things have changed in "our world". Toxins, virus and nutrition to name a few. Not JUST parasites. And all of these have been "blamed" for MS by someone at some point as well. Until its proven which "caused" it, there is a pretty BIG if involved here.Lyon wrote:If true, MS predisposition isn't a weakness or fault per se, but the human natural state in the absence of the parasites which had evolved to control (and in which the human immune system evolved to ALLOW to control) certain aspects of our immune systems.
Do you also consider that AIDS "would not happen under normal conditions"?Lyon wrote:The only problem I have with the concept of considering an autoimmune adult with parasites as being "cured" is that under natural conditions MS shouldn't happen.
Evolution (i.e. "change") will always continue whether you like it or not, or whether you think its natural or fair. (Totally argumentative on my part but I typed it anyway)Lyon wrote:I'm not sure that it's fair to consider that attempting to reverse the original cause after the illness, which shouldn't exist at all in nature, is already well underway, should be expected to provide the results most people have always expected from the "cure".
I'm not sure that you have the option of taking issue with my speculations, considering that one of my first words was "IF"......Bob the expert wrote:"IF" the situation is as I think
Cure wrote:Other things have changed in "our world". Toxins, virus and nutrition to name a few. Not JUST parasites. And all of these have been "blamed" for MS by someone at some point as well. Until its proven which "caused" it, there is a pretty BIG if involved here.
Not that it constitutes CAUSE of MS, but my argument is that those other things have never shown an obvious effect on the course of MS IN ADDITION TO aligning with the correct times, places and populations involved in the MS geographic gradient and also align with our changed living conditions afforded by the simultaneous onset of the industrial revolution and (at least in the US) the change to a currency based economy.Just keep in mind the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Bugs ain't the ONLY thing that changed recently. Professors' salaries have also increased, together with the rise of computers and the cost of living, as well as air travel and the use of English.
Cure, if you ever want to take the wind out of my sails, just agree with me one time.CureOrBust wrote:what? were you expecting me to say "you had me at hello"?
Hi Cure,CureOrBust wrote:well, you know if someone was selling (sterilised) pig worms in Australia, I'd be more than prepared to drink them down (mixed with something); that's at least half agreeing with you isn't it?
I have to agree with you. I think they'll easily distinguish themselves from the placebo effect in trials, but I don't think they are going to work 100% of the time in 100% of the MS population, or even anywhere near that.CureOrBust wrote: I just don't think the little fellas are the ultimate answer.
Users browsing this forum: cognitivelydissonant