86 replies to this topic

[Hip]

Antibiotics and fasting

I am really interested in your opinion about my hypothesis, which has been ripening in my head for the past several years. The idea is that by combining an antibiotic therapy with fasting one can greatly increase the efficiency of fasting as a health improvement method.

A very interesting idea.

due to some personal history, I have never had faith in "autoimmune" paradigm, having been the follower of the pathogen etiology of all diseases (aside from obvious poisonings, trauma and genetic mishaps, of course).

Autoimmunity and infectious pathogens are intimately related, and it is quite probably that most, if not all, autoimmune states and diseases are directly caused by chronic infections with pathogens. Many microbes are known to ramp up autoimmunity once they enter the body, particularly enteroviruses. Autoimmunity is your own body attacking itself in error, but evidence suggests that it is the pathogens in your body that precipitates and maintains this autoimmunity in the first place.

So autoimmunity, which drives numerous diseases, is likely just another facet of the pernicious effects that infectious pathogens have in the body. If you wiped out the pathogens in your body, I suspect all autoimmunity you have would soon subside.

There are ruffly two types of the bugs: those that succumb to autophagy and those that exploit it for their own growth. Thus, if you only have bugs of the first type, a week or two of fasting should cure you. But if you have both types then you are basically screwed, because as you upregulate autophagy to fight the first type of bugs, the second type proliferates, and visa versa.

So your idea would, in theory, work best to fight intracellular bacterial pathogens that are the type that succumb to autophagy, rather than the ones that exploit it for their own growth.

You need to make a list of which intracellular bacterial pathogens are the ones that succumb to autophagy, as these are perhaps the ones that your approach would work on.

I noticed long ago that fasting immediately after a course of antibiotics not only prevents such unpleasant problem from occurring in the first place, but that the fast itself proceeds much easier and gives better results.

Very interesting. Perhaps taking high dose prebiotics and probiotics before a fast might achieve similar results, by reducing pathogenic bacteria in the gut.

I believe that combining antibiotics with fasting, we can achieve remarkable results. (I never used antibiotics during a fast, but only just before or the first couple of days going into).

Remember though that intracellular bacteria are just one class of pathogen. Autophagy would not work for killing extracellular bacteria that live outside of human cells (which is a large set of bacteria).

Autophagy perhaps might work for killing viruses in their latent state. Latent viruses wait inside your cells for a chance to reactivate; some just wait until the immune system, is weak, and then they reactivate and break out of the human cell they were hiding in, and go off to infect more cells. This is how herpes simplex virus works: it waits inside your cells for the right moment, and then when your immune system is weak, it activates, breaks out of your cells, and you get a cold sore.

Viral latency is the mechanism that allows viral infections to remain in our bodies for life.

It would also be interesting to find which viruses succumb to autophagy, and then, adapting your idea, use fasting plus the appropriate antivirals to attack those viruses.

This fasting plus antivirals will not work for enteroviruses, because I just checked, and found out that enteroviruses exploit autophagy for replication, so fasting is not going to fight off lifelong enteroviruses infections. Shame because enteroviruses are linked to lots of diseases, including chronic fatigue syndrome, which I have.

Edited by Hip, 11 October 2012 - 06:39 AM.

[xEva]

Hi Hip, thank you for your reply.

Autoimmunity and infectious pathogens are intimately related, and it is quite probably that most, if not all, autoimmune states and diseases are directly caused by chronic infections with pathogens. Many microbes are known to ramp up autoimmunity once they enter the body, particularly enteroviruses. Autoimmunity is your own body attacking itself in error, but evidence suggests that it is the pathogens in your body that precipitates and maintains this autoimmunity in the first place.

So autoimmunity, which drives numerous diseases, is likely just another facet of the pernicious effects that infectious pathogens have in the body. If you wiped out the pathogens in your body, I suspect all autoimmunity you have would soon subside.

Well, I know the view of the establishment and it does not make sense from the evolutionary standpoint. Why would genes that make the body take itself apart be allowed to proliferate when the basic survival is so tough? It only makes sense from the POV of pathogens cooperating in disrupting the immune system by exploiting its various components for their own growth. This explains why not one specific pathogen was ever found decisive in such conditions: one needs several types cooperating in such a way that it makes it impossible for the immune system to take them out.

I remember being diagnosed with autoimmune conditions by various doctors on both continents. After many years of suffering a course of antibiotics proved curative. If I did not take matters in my own hands, I would still be sick, most likely an invalid by now.

So your idea would, in theory, work best to fight intracellular bacterial pathogens that are the type that succumb to autophagy, rather than the ones that exploit it for their own growth.

See, autophagy is not just about cellular immunity. It is essential for cellular homeostasis and metabolism. Even adaptive immunity does not work without autophagy, because things like major histocompatibility complex (MHC) depend on it for antigen presentation. So, whatever bugs ail us, the first thing to do is to upregulate autophagy, even if just for a short while, like with a 24-36h weekly fast.

You need to make a list of which intracellular bacterial pathogens are the ones that succumb to autophagy, as these are perhaps the ones that your approach would work on.

I started to make such a list couple of years ago. But then I realized that, even though the list grows every year, we still know nothing about most of the bugs (and I doubt that we will ever know all about all bugs). This means that a strategy based on observation of self and cooperation with your own body rather than with some scientific theory, is the way to go. Besides, it's not so simple; there are many components to the immune system and various pathogens persist by exploiting a particular niche. Simply diminishing the number of types of bugs is going in the right direction.

I noticed long ago that fasting immediately after a course of antibiotics not only prevents such unpleasant problem from occurring in the first place, but that the fast itself proceeds much easier and gives better results.

Very interesting. Perhaps taking high dose prebiotics and probiotics before a fast might achieve similar results, by reducing pathogenic bacteria in the gut.

Not for when you fast. Fasting body eats up, literally, all the bugs the macrophages fish out in various places. I think there is another part of the anatomy/physiology not well explored and that is the role of the lymphatic system and the spleen in nutrition/metabolism (far beyond chylomicrons). My hunch is that spleen sequesters the infected macrophages and ejects them into the stomach (when it is thoroughly empty), where they are immediately doused with HCl and digested. This works very well when you fast and you can observe the process, starting with spastic contractions in spleen/stomach, followed by something appearing in the stomach, which is then digested as usual.

IMHO probiotics only work mildly for the gut and skin issues, but do nothing for the tissue pathogens. Probiotics are known to invade the body and cause disease when the immune system is down. Large part of their impact is in continuous stimulation of the immunity. With probiotics you simply choose the lesser of two evils.

Remember though that intracellular bacteria are just one class of pathogen. Autophagy would not work for killing extracellular bacteria that live outside of human cells (which is a large set of bacteria).

Actually, unless they are in a biofilm, which would indicate a far-gone condition, most internal bugs sit quietly inside some vacuole in a cell and do not venture much out, because the immune patrol will take them out very fast (that's why they spread when the immunity is down). It is these bugs, I believe, that cause the most grief. It seems that even viral infections become worse when some mycoplasmas and whatnot is present. I think our bodies can deal with viruses pretty well. It is the intracellular bacteria that mess up the immunity to such an extent that the doors become wide open for other pathogens to get in.

Viral latency is the mechanism that allows viral infections to remain in our bodies for life.

I don't believe this. This is from the same category when they said that no new brain cells ever grow but only die, that things always get worse and never better, etc. etc.

It would also be interesting to find which viruses succumb to autophagy, and then, adapting your idea, use fasting plus the appropriate antivirals to attack those viruses.

I still think that the main thing is not viruses but the more common bugs like bacteria. Regardless of their type, antibiotics before a fast do knock them down and then the immune sys takes care of the rest.

This fasting plus antivirals will not work for enteroviruses, because I just checked, and found out that enteroviruses exploit autophagy for replication, so fasting is not going to fight off lifelong enteroviruses infections. Shame because enteroviruses are linked to lots of diseases, including chronic fatigue syndrome, which I have.

Yes, you're right, such conditions preclude one from engaging in long fasts. In the past, they tried to treat polio with fasts and it never worked. But short fasts, which are not even fasts proper, 24-36h a week, do wonders for such conditions. In 6 months people find great improvement and in a year many consider themselves cured.


.

Edited by xEva, 11 October 2012 - 04:55 PM.

[Hip]

Viral latency is the mechanism that allows viral infections to remain in our bodies for life.

I don't believe this. This is from the same category when they said that no new brain cells ever grow but only die, that things always get worse and never better, etc. etc.

You don't believe this?!

You dont' believe that viruses can enter a latency state?!

So what mechanism do think allows herpes simplex virus 1 to hide within the facial skin around your lips for months or years, and then occasionally re-emerge as an active infection — as a cold sore — shedding active viral particles from the sore that will infect other people that have close contact with you? That mechanism is viral latency.

Herpes simplex virus, like many viruses that can live in a latent state permanently inside our cells, achieves this latency by converting to a form called an episome. This episome is the "suspended animation" state of the virus. Episomes reside within our cells. A viral episome can remain latent inside a human cell indefinitely.

Have a read about viral latency and the episome form that viruses convert to remain in "suspended animation".

I think our bodies can deal with viruses pretty well.

Unfortunately this is not the case.

There are numerous common viruses that unfortunately become permanent residents within the body, and then precipitate various serious diseases, because the body cannot eliminate these viruses.

Obviously HIV, and its two cousin viruses HTLV 1 and 2, are the first examples that need to be mentioned in terms of the body's inability to cope with and eliminate viruses. But there are lots more viral examples like this.

HTLV, by the way, is the human T-cell lymphotropic virus. This virus causes a mild HIV-like deterioration in health, but it occurs slowly over many decades. HTLV 1 infection is rife in the Caribbean, South America, and the south west of Japan. HTLV is not found in the US, except tin Florida. HTLV 1 can also cause leukemia (blood cancer).

Then there is human papilloma virus which cannot eradicated from the skin, and causes cervical cancer, and can also cause mouth cancer.

Kaposi's Sarcoma can be caused by herpes 8 virus (HHV-8). HHV-8 cannot be eliminated from the body once you have it, like most viruses.

Hepatitis C virus infection generally remains in the liver as a lifelong infection, causing a chronic fatigue type condition, and causing liver cancer in some people, and vasculitis in others. Intensive interferon therapy for a year can sometimes eradicte this virus, but then that is medical intervention, not the body that is eradicating it. The body is helpless in the case of hepatitis C virus.

Hepatitis B virus is another one that can cause liver cancer.

Epstein-Barr virus, which most people acquire when they are a teenager when they get mononucleosis, remains in the body for life, and can sometimes cause the cancer called nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Epstein-Barr virus is found in 95% of the adult population.

And these are just some of the proven cases of viruses in the body causing serious disease.

For every proven case, there are dozens more cases of viruses that are strongly linked to various diseases, as follows:

Further examples of viruses that become permanent residents in the body, and are linked to various diseases:

Herpes simplex virus 1 is associated with Alzheimer's disease in individuals who possess the APOE-4 gene.

Echovirus infection of the central nervous system is found in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Cytomegalovirus, which around 50% of the population will have acquired by the time they are an adult, is a nasty virus linked to anxiety disorder, autism (if caught during pregnancy), autoimmune diseases, brain tumor, dementia, depression, diabetes mellitus type 2, Guillain–Barré syndrome, lupus, metabolic syndrome, and myocardial infarction.

Human respiratory syncytial virus is linked to asthma.

Autoimmune diseases are strongly linked to Coxsackie B virus. There are 6 types of Coxsackie B virus, and one or more of these potent Coxsackie B viruses is found in 55% of adults. Autoimmune conditions are also associated Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus, and parvovirus B19.

Bornavirus infection of the brain is linked to bipolar disorder. Bornavirus is found in 30% of the adult population.

Human herpesvirus 6, which is found in 90% of the adult population, is linked to ADHD, chronic fatigue syndrome, epilepsy, and multiple sclerosis

Parvovirus B19, which is found in 50% of adults, is linked to autoimmune diseases, chronic fatigue syndrome, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and vasculitis.


If you catch any of the above viruses, they will remain in your body for life, and all the time, they are likely increasing your risk for the above diseases. Statistics indicate that you certainly will catch and retain many of the above viruses (you probably have several of these viruses already within your body if you are over around 20 years old — and they remain there forever).

See also: List of human diseases associated with infectious pathogens - Wikipedia



By the way, one nasty intracellular bacterium that is linked to autoimmunity is Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

Since you say you have been plagued with autoimmune problems, have you ever been tested for Mycobacterium tuberculosis? The QuantiFERON Gold test is the most accurate test for this bacterium.

[xEva]

Viral latency is the mechanism that allows viral infections to remain in our bodies for life.

I don't believe this. This is from the same category when they said that no new brain cells ever grow but only die, that things always get worse and never better, etc. etc.

You don't believe this?!

You dont' believe that viruses can enter a latency state?!

Stop! lol, that was for life part that I do not believe. That the bugs persist in the body in a latency state is a given. And that's my thesis, in fact. But I think that a complete cure is always possible. I am an optimist


.

Edited by xEva, 11 October 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[xEva]

Since you say you have been plagued with autoimmune problems, have you ever been tested for Mycobacterium tuberculosis? The QuantiFERON Gold test is the most accurate test for this bacterium.

-?? You seem to misunderstand me -? I never said that. I was diagnosed with juvenile arthritis and then some other things, but after I have cured myself with antibiotics, which was decades ago, I never looked back and never believed in autoimmune paradigm. Because of that, I have no such diseases, cause, I'll tell you frankly, the moment I feel a joint pain, which last time happened ~2003, I take antibiotics and have it over with. No "autoimmune" problems here

[Hip]

Stop! lol, that was for life part that I do not believe. That the bugs persist in the body in a latency state is a given. And that's my thesis, in fact. But I think that a complete cure is always possible. I am an optimist

I am also a great optimist. But at present there are almost no cures for the viruses that have invaded our bodies. However, I am sure there soon will be complete cures. It is the nature of human beings to conquer difficulties like this.

The first step to conquering such problems is becoming aware of them. You average scientist is not even aware of the links between the pathogens commonly found in the human body, and the serious diseases they may precipiate. Once it is better understood that these microbes are linked to serious chronic diseases, then I think more effort and money will be poured into eradicating these microbes.

So at present the main hinderance to developing cures for these various pathogenic microbial infections is not a technical one; it is the fact that most people do not believe or are not aware that microbes likely underpin most chronic disease, hence the lack of interest and funding in this area.

70% of all deaths in the US are due to chronic diseases, so these microbes may be killing most of us.

I was diagnosed with juvenile arthritis and then some other things, but after I have cured myself with antibiotics, which was decades ago, I never looked back and never believed in autoimmune paradigm. Because of that, I have no such diseases, cause, I'll tell you frankly, the moment I feel a joint pain, which last time happened ~2003, I take antibiotics and have it over with. No "autoimmune" problems here

The autoimmune paradigm is beyond any doubt. There is ample evidence, for example, to show that auto-antibodies exist in the blood in certain autoimmune conditions, and that these auto-antibodies attack parts of our own bodies.

Auto-antibodies often arise by what is called molecular mimicry. Molecular mimicry occurs when a part of an invading microbe has similar molecular shape to a particular part of the human body. So when the immune system makes antibodies to attack that invading microbe, unfortunately these antibodies will then go on to attack that particular part of the body. If that part of you happens to be the myelin sheath that surrounds your nerves, then you have multiple sclerosis.

In military terms, autoimmunity is like friendly fire, where you attack your own side because you have mistaken them for the enemy. Auto-antibodies are like bullets that should have been targeted at the enemy, but instead are hitting your own men.

But if you kill of that microbe, then the body stops making antibodies to attack it, and so the antibody attack on your own body also dies down, and you may then cure your autoimmune disease.


I suspect that the antibiotics you took may have killed off or subdued a bacterial infection that was driving your autoimmunity — the autoimmunity that was behind your juvenile arthritis.

I think your approach was excellent. Instead of treating the autoimmunity and juvenile arthritis, you got to the root of the problem, and wiped out the bacteria causing the autoimmunity in the first place.

In future, I think that many diseases may well be cured like this: with a new generation of super-potent, super-safe antibiotics, antivirals, anti-fungals and anti-protozoal drugs that eliminate the pathogens causing the disease.

In other words, in future, we will be curing diseases at their pathogenic microbe roots, rather than just palliating their symptoms.

Edited by Hip, 11 October 2012 - 10:31 PM.

[xEva]

... at present there are almost no cures for the viruses that have invaded our bodies. However, I am sure there soon will be complete cures. It is the nature of human beings to conquer difficulties like this.

Yes, but I believe that we have inner resources of which most of us are not even aware. Given a chance, the body can rid itself of any pathogen. We need to learn how to help it doing what it learned to do in hundreds of millions of years.

I completely agree with your assessment that most people don't even see this problem, and yet it is obvious to all those who considered it seriously:

The first step to conquering such problems is becoming aware of them. You average scientist is not even aware of the links between the pathogens commonly found in the human body, and the serious diseases they may precipiate. Once it is better understood that these microbes are linked to serious chronic diseases, then I think more effort and money will be poured into eradicating these microbes.

So at present the main hinderance to developing cures for these various pathogenic microbial infections is not a technical one; it is the fact that most people do not believe or are not aware that microbes likely underpin most chronic disease, hence the lack of interest and funding in this area.

70% of all deaths in the US are due to chronic diseases, so these microbes may be killing most of us.

Well said I also think that most people believe that it is just impossible in principle. We live among all sorts of bugs and it is impossible to find "a cure" for each. As it is impossible to live a life fully and not to pick up some critters here and there. That's why I believe in periodic bombing, lol, followed by a fast, with which the body clears the creeps out and renews its immune components. Which is a very important point in all this. A fast clears old infected macrophages <-- I believe that, even though I can't prove that. There is hardly any research on fasting humans, unfortunately, 'cause there is no money in it.

if you kill of that microbe, then the body stops making antibodies to attack it, and so the antibody attack on your own body also dies down, and you may then cure your autoimmune disease.

exactly

I suspect that the antibiotics you took may have killed off or subdued a bacterial infection that was driving your autoimmunity &mdash; the autoimmunity that was behind your juvenile arthritis.

Why suspect? That's exactly how it was. Even though with the first cure I got lucky, because I picked up a nasty obvious infection, for which I had a long course of antibiotics. The result was that my juvenile arthritis was gone after that. It was the Crohn disease that I cured myself after noticing that a short course of a particular antibiotic gave an improvement. I could not convince my GP to give me a long-term prescription for the same drug. I begged, but instead he wrote a referral to a shrink (!) on a script blank. I wiped out the referral and wrote the prescription for what I needed on it. 2 weeks later I was completely cured from my long standing "chronic autoimmune" disease. This was long, long time ago. The disease has never returned. And to think how many years I suffered with it! It horrifies me to think that I could have yielded to his authority and still would be sick with it.

In future, I think that many diseases may well be cured like this: with a new generation of super-potent, super-safe antibiotics, antivirals, anti-fungals and anti-protozoal drugs that eliminate the pathogens causing the disease.

In other words, in future, we will be curing diseases at their pathogenic microbe roots, rather than just palliating their symptoms.

See, I don't think so. I don't think it is possible to find a cure for each and every bug which keeps on evolving as we speak. What we can do is to periodically clear the infections or at least lessen the load, which, for me, fasts do.


.

Edited by xEva, 12 October 2012 - 12:31 AM.

[xEva]

Since we are at it, I can tell you right off the bat which viruses yield to fasting and which do not (among those that I checked a year or two ago).

Viral infections a fast can help against:

• all Herpes family
• all Pappiloma family
• cytomegalovirus

Not good to fast longer than 3-4 days:

• Hepatitis C
• Hepatitis B
• enteroviruses

The rest I'm not sure or don't remember. But the new info is coming in daily These lists will never end... What I found is that people who attempt to fast with the second type of viruses (some brave souls tried it with Hep C) they can't go on beyond the first few days. This was noticed long before the info that Hep C virus exploits autophagy became known. The moral here is that one should not force oneself to fast, or undergo whatever therapy, against which the body rebels. I learned it hard way.

[Hip]

Very interesting list, xEva.

One other angle to consider, in addition to autophagy, is what is called the Th1/Th2 balance of your immune system. As you may know, the immune system can either shift towards the Th1 mode, or towards the Th2 mode, but not both at the same time.

The Th1 mode is the intracellular branch of the immune system: the part of the immune system that targets pathogens that live inside human cells; such pathogens include viruses, and intracellular bacteria such as Chlamydia pneumoniae.

By contrast, the Th2 mode is the branch of the immune system that targets pathogens that live outside human cells; such pathogens include myriad bacteria, including: Helicobacter, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, Clostridium, Salmonella, Klebsiella, Proteus, Escherichia and many others, as well as fungi, and protozoa.

Various drugs, herbs and supplements can shift the balance of Th1 and Th2 activity towards either Th1 or towards Th2.

If you are concerned with eliminating pathogens inside your cells, you might consider not only inducing autophagy by fasting, but also taking supplements that activate the Th1 branch of the immune system.

Edited by Hip, 12 October 2012 - 07:37 AM.

[xEva]

Actually, that Th1 <-> Th2 model is old. It turns out there is no such strict division. The proper understanding of the immune sys is still emerging.

I found that antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are far more revealing about how the immune sys works at the most primitive, basic, level. AMPs are short proteins that kill microbes by disrupting their membranes. They constitute the first line of defense. The automatic production of these peptides is the most primitive immune defense there is. It is shared by all eukariotes, that's how old it is. It shows that for an eukaryote, a good bacterium is a dead bacterium: eukaryotic cells produce AMPs automatically once they sense the presence of a microbe in their vicinity. The side-effect from these natural antibiotics is messed up mitochondria, since their membranes are very similar to bacterial.

If you still go by the old (and outdated) Th1-Th2 theory, you're missing the true picture of the outright WAR eukaryotes waged against microbes since the very beginning of time.

Chew on this info for a while and you will get a far more clear picture on what microbes are to us. Think, why an eukaryote risks willingly to mess up its own mitochondria just to make sure that a microbe nearby IS DEAD.

For your info --I have a feeling all this is brand new to you-- the intestinal epithelial cells produce copious amounts of these peptides, thus creating a layer through which no bug should pass. The so called symbionts living in the gut are only good for stimulating the production of these peptides by their mere presence. While being not too virulent themselves, they ensure that if a real bad bug comes along, it has less of a chance to invade, because the mucous layer is already soaked with AMPs.

Yeah, live and learn. Most people's ideas of what is a symbiont are largely outdated.

[aim1]

Hepatitis C virus infection generally remains in the liver as a lifelong infection, causing a chronic fatigue type condition, and causing liver cancer in some people, and vasculitis in others. Intensive interferon therapy for a year can sometimes eradicte this virus, but then that is medical intervention, not the body that is eradicating it. The body is helpless in the case of hepatitis C virus.

FYI...there are some amazing drugs in the pipeline that can eradicate Hepatitis C, some without interferon.
Look at GS 7977 and others.

[Hip]

The Th1/Th2 model is old, but certainly not outdated. Many of the leading clinical researchers and doctors of chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) are using this model to treat their patients.

Chronic fatigue syndrome is a disease in which it is thought there is too much Th2 activity of the immune system, and thus too little Th1 activity. Since Th1 is the antiviral/intracellular immune response, ME/CFS patients are unable to clear the viruses/intracellular pathogens from their body, and so they descend into the often dire condition of ME/CFS.

Many of the immunomodulator drugs and supplements used by ME/CFS patients are ones that shift the Th1/Th2 balance towards Th1, in order to boost their immune system's antiviral responses.

The only major amendment to the Th1/Th2 model that I am aware of is the more recent discovery of the Th17 mode of the immune system. So now in fact you have to consider the overall balance between Th1, Th2, and Th17 immune responses.

Antimicrobial peptides: presumably you have been reading Trevor Marshall's account of chronic diseases and how to treat them. I do like Marshall's ideas, but he also seems to have this strange notion that viruses cannot do harm, with Marshall's saying that intracellular bacteria are the only cause of chronic diseases like ME/CFS. The Marshall Protocol that Trevor Marshall advocates involves taking the drug Benicar, which ramps up the secretion of antimicrobial peptides inside the cell. These antimicrobial peptides are part of our cell's internal immune system.

The antimicrobial peptides that are released inside human cells by the Marshall Protocol (namely beta defensin and cathelicidin) are, unfortunately, more effective against intracellular bacteria than they are against viruses within human cells.

Now, some forms of ME/CFS are driven by intracellular bacteria, but most forms of ME/CFS appear to be driven by viral infection. Hence I cannot see that the Marshall Protocol is going to be effective for most people with ME/CFS. I tried the Marshall Protocol for 3 months a while ago, but I did not have any noticeable improvements.

Edited by Hip, 12 October 2012 - 09:26 PM.

[Hip]

Hepatitis C virus infection generally remains in the liver as a lifelong infection, causing a chronic fatigue type condition, and causing liver cancer in some people, and vasculitis in others. Intensive interferon therapy for a year can sometimes eradicte this virus, but then that is medical intervention, not the body that is eradicating it. The body is helpless in the case of hepatitis C virus.

FYI...there are some amazing drugs in the pipeline that can eradicate Hepatitis C, some without interferon.
Look at GS 7977 and others.

Very interesting.

Though more excitingly for me (as I have ME/CFS): there is apparently a new hepatitis C virus drug coming out soon (it may be the one you mentioned) which is apparently capable of eliminating the so-called non-cytopathic enteroviruses found in the cells of ME/CFS patients. Non-cytopathic enteroviruses are a sort of stealth virus that hides within human cells; these non-cytopathic viruses derive from regular enteroviruses, but change form.

Dr John Chia, the world's leading expert in enterovirus-driven ME/CFS, thinks that these insidious non-cytopathic enteroviruses may be a major problem in ME/CFS, and he thinks they need to be eradicated, along with the regular enteroviruses found in ME/CFS patients.

I don't know the name of this hepatitis C virus drug that is supposed to eliminate non-cytopathic enteroviruses, but I read that it is going to be available within a few years.

Edited by Hip, 12 October 2012 - 09:25 PM.

[Hip]

I suspect that the antibiotics you took may have killed off or subdued a bacterial infection that was driving your autoimmunity &mdash; the autoimmunity that was behind your juvenile arthritis.

Why suspect? That's exactly how it was. Even though with the first cure I got lucky, because I picked up a nasty obvious infection, for which I had a long course of antibiotics. The result was that my juvenile arthritis was gone after that. It was the Crohn disease that I cured myself after noticing that a short course of a particular antibiotic gave an improvement. I could not convince my GP to give me a long-term prescription for the same drug. I begged, but instead he wrote a referral to a shrink (!) on a script blank. I wiped out the referral and wrote the prescription for what I needed on it. 2 weeks later I was completely cured from my long standing "chronic autoimmune" disease. This was long, long time ago. The disease has never returned. And to think how many years I suffered with it! It horrifies me to think that I could have yielded to his authority and still would be sick with it.

Why suspect? Because it is never possible to be entirely sure of why a drug has helped. Antibiotics often have several modes of action, in addition to their normal antibacterial activity. The antibiotic azithromycin for example is an immunomodulator, an antiviral, as well as an antibacterial. The antibiotic doxycycline also has anti-inflammatory action, inhibits nitric oxide synthesis, and inhibits the connective tissues destroying enzymes MMP-8 and MMP-9.

Though I agree that the most likely explanation for your recovery is that the antibiotics you took subdued or wiped out a bacterial infection causing your juvenile arthritis.

Which antibiotics did you take, by the way?

[xEva]

The body is helpless in the case of hepatitis C virus.

FYI...there are some amazing drugs in the pipeline that can eradicate Hepatitis C, some without interferon.

Oh! Thank you for bringing this up. I mean Hip's "The body is helpless against thehepatitis C virus." Why, most people exposed to HCV do not develop chronic condition. Certainly, it is a nasty virus but, depending on population and their dominant coinfections, many clear the virus on their own within 6 months (some people sooner) and only the rest goes on to the chronic stage. There are also people who, after years of a chronic disease, made some changes in their lifestyle and beat the infection on their own. It is always difficult to estimate how many people were exposed to a virus but did not develop a chronic disease. I've seen some more and some less optimistic reports about this. You Hip sound rather pessimistic. This is not conducive to recovery from a chronic illness. Cheer up

The Th1/Th2 model is old, but certainly not outdated. Many of the leading clinical researchers and doctors of chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) are using this model to treat their patients.

I know. After people invested decades into a theory they do not just drop it, even when it turns out wrong. But how can it be right, if it was based on glaring gaps in knowledge? I'd be weary following such a theory and... How successful in practice is it? Why those who follow it just continue being chronic patients? The specialties of their doctors change and their symptoms are somewhat alleviated.. But I am not aware of many who recovered completely following that theory.


And my interest in antimicrobial peptides has nothing to do with Marshal protocol. I know about it since my long interest in antibiotics, but this is the first time I hear about AMPs in conjunction with his protocol -? Is it the latest development? I have not been to his site in a couple of years.

AMPs were a buzzword in immunology several years ago. When I first heard about them, I could not get enough and read everything. They opened up my eyes on what is immunity. And I suggest you study them for what they are, apart from whatever theories. Immunity starts with an eukaryotic cell and AMPs. The same is with metabolism in various diets. If you want to understand it, you start with the metabolism of a fast and then build on it.


.

Edited by xEva, 13 October 2012 - 07:04 PM.

[Hip]

You Hip sound rather pessimistic.

No, I would not say pessimistic; more realistic and pragmatic.

Being quaintly optimistic can sometimes become a decadent way to ignore issues. The issues in this case are the fact that 70% of us die from chronic disease, rather than live to the end of our natural lifespans, and the culprit in these early deaths is very likely infectious pathogens playing a causal role in vast swathes of chronic disease.

Being optimist and saying "I hope I won't be in that 70%" is really just putting your head in the sand.

The whole situation of infectious causes of chronic disease is largely being ignored by politicians and policymakers. Where is the government think tank or institution that addresses this huge problem of infectious pathogenic microbes being linked to fatal chronic diseases the human population? There really isn't one.

We spend billions on counter-terrorism, and talk about terrorism all the time, yet ignore the possibility that in all likelihood, 70% of us are routinely killed by common pathogenic microbes. Something clearly needs to be done about it, in a pro-active fashion.

Quaint treatments like fasting may occasionally work or help for chronic diseases, but if they were universally effective, do you really think individuals in the US would collectively spend $1700 billion annually on the treatment of chronic diseases?

Equally, saying that a few people have cured themselves of chronic hepatitis C infection of the liver by fasting or dietary intervention is very interesting, and certainly something that should be tried, but it does not help the 95% of people that have a hepatitis C virus infection that will not budge under any circumstances.

Believing that fasting is a cure-all is just a form of 'putting your head in the sand' blind optimism.

The Th1/Th2 model is old, but certainly not outdated. Many of the leading clinical researchers and doctors of chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) are using this model to treat their patients.

After people invested decades into a theory they do not just drop it, even when it turns out wrong.

Can you refer me to any scientific publications that demonstrate the Th1/Th2 balance model is wrong. I'd like to see where you get your information from.

Edited by Hip, 13 October 2012 - 07:27 PM.

[corb]

It's only a part of the problem.

Aging is the body not keeping up with damage.
Inflammation is the main signal of the body being damaged.
Pathogens cause inflammation ergo they damage the body.
But so do other irritants. The list is quite extensive in fact.

If the cause of aging was so centralized we would've had no need for this forum by now.

[xEva]

The whole situation of infectious causes of chronic disease is largely being ignored by politicians and policymakers. <strong>Where is the government think tank or institution that addresses this huge problem of infectious pathogenic microbes being linked to fatal chronic diseases the human population?</strong> There really isn't one.

We spend billions on counter-terrorism, and talk about terrorism all the time, yet ignore the possibility that in all likelihood, 70% of us are routinely killed by common pathogenic microbes. Something clearly needs to be done about it, in a pro-active fashion.

Well said! I sure hope those politicians will hear you. But I doubt that, because first you have to be heard by the masses, who then will push on the politicians. And the masses don't think that microbes are the problem. The masses love their microbes. Why, they eat junk food with their unwashed hands in a movie theater or in a subway, shake hands and kiss left and right... Eat out in street cafes on a windy day, not minding at all that their food is seasoned with dried manure with which the loans in the neighborhood were recently fertilized. I saw this street cafe situation with dry manure flying around on Melrose in LA, twice a year, spring and fall. The same people blame chemicals for their chronic diseases. Oh, don't get me started...

See, I am not waiting for politicians or for a breakthrough. I tend to take matters in my own hands. That's why I do what I do and I do not expect masses to follow me. It takes years to learn what I know and this knowledge largely concerns me and what works for me. And I am not comfortable giving out recommendations, simply because a study of 1 does not warrant it.

Quaint treatments like fasting may occasionally work or help for chronic diseases, but if they were universally effective, do you really think individuals in the US would collectively spend $1700 billion annually on the treatment of chronic diseases?

lol, just not to go too far, many people on this board were willing to invest in a pill that would allow them to eat all they want and have the results of a fast. Some still believe that this absurdity is possible. The thing is not whether fasting works or not. The thing is that it is difficult. We don't like to be hungry. We'd rather die of obesity.

Can you refer me to any scientific publications that demonstrate the Th1/Th2 balance model is wrong. I'd like to see where you get your information from.

Well, actually, I read it a few years ago, in the same period when I was into AMPs. I read scientific literature. The introduction section is where you get the latest scoop on the developments. I suggest you google for nature and science reviews on AMPs (they are called somewhat different nowadays, I don't recall at this very moment what, but at the time, they were still AMPs). At the time, in several introductions I saw the reference that the Th1-Th2 theory was simplistic and did not reflect the reality.

But say, you do know that this theory is rather old. Considering the advances in biotech in the recent years, how can you even think that the theory that took none of that into account may be right? It is based on maybe 25% of what is known now.

But this is very common occurrence in science. After people invest their lives, their PhDs, their carriers into a theory, they never let it go. Not till their death. That's how it has always been.

[xEva]

It's only a part of the problem.

Aging is the body not keeping up with damage.
Inflammation is the main signal of the body being damaged.
Pathogens cause inflammation ergo they damage the body.
But so do other irritants. The list is quite extensive in fact.

If the cause of aging was so centralized we would've had no need for this forum by now.

corb, you're right about the irritants. Don't know how things are now in Bulgaria, but in most parts of the West today our environment is cleaner than it has ever been. The greatest irritant up until very recently was smoke from cooking, lighting and heating the houses. And up until about the middle of the 20th C it was also heavy metals. This is hardly spoken about these days. People laugh at blood lettings but considering how widespread iron and heavy metal exposure was, first of all from iron pots and pans, bloodletting was the best therapy for most diseases of those times.

And so, nowadays irritants are not the problem. Nowadays, our immediate environment is cleaner than it has ever been in our whole history. Which leaves us microbes as the culprits for chronic inflammation that drives all other diseases.

You are yet another example of a person who does not see the real problem. Hip is right about that. People do not see it. Seeing it implies changing so many of our habits. Historically, hygiene measures were always met with resistance.

[AgeVivo]

germ-free mice do not escape aging, far from it.=> pathogenic microbes do not seem to be a major cause of aging => what should we focus on instead?

Edited by AgeVivo, 13 October 2012 - 09:47 PM.

[corb]

And so, nowadays irritants are not the problem. Nowadays, our immediate environment is cleaner than it has ever been in our whole history. Which leaves us microbes as the culprits for chronic inflammation that drives all other diseases.

I meant irritant in a more general meaning - things that can irritate the immune system - chemicals, aged or cancerous cells, etc.

And to answer your questions, we're about as hygienic as western europe. Probably not as hygienic as the states but it varies from person to person and from household to household.

The whole hygiene argument is obscure in my opinion, the japanese use public baths and cook most foods barehanded and that doesn't stop them from leading in longevity statistics.

what should we focus on instead?

It's not really a matter of "instead", viruses can cause deadly diseases like cancer and hiv so they are part of the problem.
Also as far as I know SPF mice aren't completely pathogen free.

[xEva]

germ-free mice do not escape aging, far from it.=> pathogenic microbes do not seem to be a major cause of aging => what should we focus on instead?

You completely do not understand...

First, this is *not* about being germ free in the gut, on the skin and mucous membranes. This is about being germ free in your tissues, in the cells that make up the organs of your body. It amazes me that people get suddenly blind when faces with this issue. Is it so difficult to understand?

Second, there is no germ-free mice. If NASA could not assure sterility in their labs, to accomplish which they used the best of technology --and they did not need to spare some living things like mice while sterilizing, think of that!-- I do not believe for a second in the existence of germ-free mice. There is no germ-free life. This ignorance of basic facts of biology only reinforces the old belief, based on old, outdated technology that used petri-dish cultures to demonstrate the lack of pathogens. Please. And besides, I repeat for the tenth time, it is not about not having microbes living in your gut and on your skin -- which, physiologically speaking, is OUTSIDE your body. I'm talking about the insides (*not* the gut).

Third, human tissues, which until not long ago were believed to be sterile, showed presence of DNA of various microbes. This is the current state of affairs. The bugs are living in us. They cause inflammation that eventually leads to all known diseases of aging. THIS is what you need to focus on.

Or, should I simply ask you: What causes chronic inflammation, according to you?

I say, it is the immune response to pathogens. What say you?

[xEva]

I meant irritant in a more general meaning - things that can irritate the immune system - chemicals, aged or cancerous cells, etc.

We have already covered chemicals. We have inborn fantastic abilities to detox whatever chemicals (within reason). Most educated people in the West live in hazardous-chemical-free conditions.

As for cancerous cells, chronic inflammation driven by pathogens that live in the cells is how these infected cells become cancerous. So, it's all about the pathogens.

And you misunderstood what I meant by hygiene. I pointed out the western custom of eating on the streets with dirty hands and in dirty environment. Even the custom of shaking hands and social kissing is conducive to spreading our collective infections.

Or take this new thing with the security in the airports, where people are forced to take off their shoes and walk a stretch unprotected. Guess how many viruses and fungi are spread this way?

That's the hygiene I'm talking about. Or rather the lack of it.

[Hip]

germ-free mice do not escape aging, far from it.=> pathogenic microbes do not seem to be a major cause of aging => what should we focus on instead?

I'd like to read that study on mice, AgeVivo, if you happen to have a reference for it handy.

I would reinforce what xEva said above about the fact that you cannot guarantee germ free mice, because many of the known pathogens are very hard to detect, and furthermore, there are almost certainly additional undiscovered pathogens that we are at present unaware of.

Also, consider that in practical terms, longevity should be not so much about extending natural lifespan, but preventing the occurrence of disease.

Why? Because the natural lifespan of a human might be say 120 years, but the vast majority don't even reach their natural lifespan due to disease killing them long before that. So disease (and the infectious microbes that likely cause it), are the main stumbling block to longevity in our current circumstances.

So at present, it is not worth trying to extend our natural lifespan of 120 years, when we don't even have a chance of getting to 120 anyway because disease nearly always hits us first.

[xEva]

The whole hygiene argument is obscure in my opinion, the japanese use public baths and cook most foods barehanded and that doesn't stop them from leading in longevity statistics.

Hygiene is not about eating or cooking barehanded, it is whether those hands were washed.

And! Japanese are one of the most hygienic people in the world. You can even buy sterilized money there (just an example). And dirty shoes are traditionally left outside. There is no handshaking or social kissing traditionally either.

[AgeVivo]

Ok thank you. I actually know nothing about germ free mice per se and I stupidly thought you were thinking about pathogenic microbes without having considered that your reasonings could be a bit strong. You seem to know that your reasonings are a bit strong but you want to continue digging in that direction, just in case.

The closest I know about is mice that live in conditions without known pathogens. In companies selling lab mice, like Charles Rivers, they get some newborns by cesarian to avoid certain potential transmission of diseases by the mother at birth, and then they make them live in special bubbles. The air that comes is filtered and the food is sterilized before being given. As a result it is found that the mice are absent of known pathogens. But I remember having asked the question, not fully absent of pathogens, as some rna/dna tests indicate that some pathogens still exist. The companies makes statistics on the animals, including survival, and that's how I know that for such mice the survival is good but nothing surprising. That's why my first guess is that pathogenic microbes do not play a major role in aging.

The remaining pathogens could lead to aging. However, I would be surprised that the remaining pathogens lead to aging, much more than the other ones. This is why I would tend to think that we should look elsewhere. But that's a feeling, not a proof. The 0.001% (I don't know) remaining microbes could have something specific and lead to aging, why not. It's one of the many many many possible reasons to age that do not seem to be relevant with rule-of-thumb arguments, but we don't know for sure.

Edited by AgeVivo, 14 October 2012 - 07:56 AM.

[Logic]

The majority of the virii metioned here are lipid coated Virii.
I suggest that those interested research these lipid layers and the substances that remove them, such as BHT and Lauric acid found in breast milk and coonut oil.
Lauric acid is used by the body to make monolaurin. Monolaurin is an antiviral, antibacterial, and antiprotozoal monoglyceride used by the body to destroy lipid-coated viruses such as HIV, herpes, cytomegalovirus, influenza, various pathogenic bacteria, including listeria monocytogenes and helicobacter pylori, and protozoa such as giardia lamblia.

Check the references here:
http://www.coconutdiet.com/viruses.htm

There is also a lot of info on people getting their Hep C viral load down to undetectable with BHT.

I expect this info to be ignored as usual, and thats ok...

[Logic]

A good discussion on BHT:
http://ask.lef.org/Topic4644.aspx

Also see the references here:
http://www.webshopem.../monolaurin.htm

Edited by Logic, 14 October 2012 - 12:25 PM.

[pone11]

There are some simmilar theories of aging. There is a theory, that inflammation leads to aging.
My oppinion, however, is that there are too many aging changes, that are not caused by germs, for example the brain atrophy - there are samples, tooken from aging brain with severe aging, and there are no any microorganisms there. So, global aging theory on the bases of microorganisms according to me is not correct.

 

It's likely that those brain autopsies are not looking at the tissue correctly.   If you look at the presentations done by the controversial Trevor Marshall, he pretty clearly shows these organisms present in cells, but they are very hard to provoke out of deep cellular structures like macrophages.  The only reliable technique to find them is DNA analysis of the genomes within the tissues.  When you do a DNA analysis, you discover a truly scary amount of bacterial DNA hidden within even healthy tissue.

 

Tangential to this issue, there are have been some studies in recent years showing a relationship between periodontal disease and Alzheimer's:

http://www.colgate.c...e-may-be-linked

 

There is even more research showing relationships between periodontal disease and heart disease.  

 

I realize Trevor Marshall's ideas about Vitamin D supplementation are controversial and not well proven.  But you can discard that idea and his core idea about bacterial loads causing autoimmune disease is not something you can easily dismiss.   His idea that the bacteria have evolved to disable the vitamin D receptor, thereby disabling the cellular innate immune system, is such a huge idea that it deserves a LOT more financing than it has attracted.  

 

Marshall's study groups have been supplementing with olmesartan and this drug has a side effect of upregulating the vitamin D receptor.  This immune stimulation therapy usually results in the patient getting *worse* for one to two years, followed by fairly dramatic recoveries in years three and beyond.  Enough people have been totally cured of some very serious autoimmune conditions that I think people need to give his ideas more serious consideration.

[pone11]

I found this very interesting study on one mechanism of aging directly promoted by chronic lifelong microbial infections in our body:

The nitric oxide hypothesis of aging



The authors state: "Our hypothesis is that recurrent infections over the life span play a significant role in producing aging changes in all systems outside the blood-brain barrier via release of toxic quantities of NO".

Nitric oxide (NO) is of course is generated in large amount to fight off viruses, bacteria, fungi, etc — at levels around 10 times higher than the NO that is produced for normal metabolic processes (NO is normally used by the body as a neurotransmitter, but at low levels).

 

The authors are clearly recording that the NO is a response to chronic infections, which is exactly what the body should do to try to kill the invaders.   So blame the health problem on the infections, not on the NO the body releases to deal with it!  To me that is a very strange study.

 

From what I have read the body loses the ability to use NO as people age, which accounts for declines in arterial wall health and declines in erectile performance in men.  The whole basis for drugs like Viagra is to stimulate the NO system in the erectile tissues.