Have just discovered the Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) thesis as possibly the major cause of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis cases, and of course Red Hill Biopharmaceuticals are also claiming it may be the causative pathogen in MS cases.
I've recently trialled a few patients with MS with the Wheldon protocol which uses abx geared to destroying Chlamydophila pneumonia (CPn) as the presumed most likely cause, with good results so far. These is some overlap in the choice of abx to kill either of these microorganisms, however the Wheldon protocol is the milder protocol of the two and it is also better at killing CPn, rather than MAP. RHB-104 is better at killing MAP than CPn, although antituberculotic drugs work against CPn somewhat.
Given the problems of retinitis, uveitis, macular degeneration and so forth often associated with MS, where CPn has been found in the blood vessels of the eye in sufferers, what is the view on the role of MAP vs CPn as the most likely pathogen in the majority of cases of MS?
Which one is the red herring?
The good news is there is also a vaccine under development for MAP as well.
John M Potter
The SP140 thesis does potentially demonstrate why only a small number of people get MS or Crohns when virtually the entire population is exposed to Cpn and MAP at some stage. Is there an inexpensive test to look for this problem as a predictor for later MS or Crohns or to take precautions to head these diseases off?
I'm also somewhat leery of vaccine safety when it comes to offering vaccinations as a solution to everything, but I suppose IF a person tested positive for the genetic weakness and this seemed to be a 100% deciding factor then it could be worth the risk of being vaxxed as a preventative measure, assuming the vax is efficacious. Or is it the case that the vax wouldn't work for such individuals, as somehow the invasive organism has a way of getting around their defences to begin with?