EBV infection - Role of neutrophils?! (Related to Post 7)

[Ardavan Shahrdar]

Dear Irene,

In the first response to the Post 7 you wrote:
Would you please mention your reference on the role of neutrophils and how they act in defense against EBV (engulfing,...)?

Regards,

Ardavan
Sent from my iPad

[Irene de Villiers]

neutrophils are a normal response to any virus. It only works in a child with intact thymus, otherwise the neutrophils cannot do what they are suppsoed to do.
A ref here:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24340961
Vestn Ross Akad Med Nauk. 2013;(7):42-6.
[Immunologic indexes, enzyme status of lymphocytes and functional activity of blood neutrophils in children with infectious mononucleosis caused by Epstein-Barr virus].
IF neutrophils are able to do their job, it does help in EBV, as in this ref:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23065753
EMBO Mol Med. 2012 Dec;4(12):1276-93. doi: 10.1002/emmm.201201569. Epub 2012 Oct 15.

Tumour inflammasome-derived IL-1β recruits neutrophils and improves local recurrence-free survival in EBV-induced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
See also with respect to neutrophil action in EBV

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22249559
Primary IgG4-related lymphadenopathy with prominent granulomatous inflammation and reactivation

of Epstein-Barr virus.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16545476
Virus Res. 2006 Aug;119(2):134-45. Epub 2006 Mar 20.

Epstein-Barr virus immunossuppression of innate immunity mediated by phagocytes.
"This review covers the current state of our knowledge relative to the role of neutrophils and monocytes
in EBVpathogenesis and describes the nature of countermeasures deployed by EBV against these
cells."

Namaste,
Irene

--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[Ardavan Shahrdar]

Dear Irene,

Thanks for the links but would you please quote where the articles are mentioning phagocytosis of EBV by neutrophils as the default mode of defense against EBV? I understand suppression and breaching of neutophil activity in EBV infection or changes in neutophil activity during EBV-related chronic conditions. But was this our subject of discussion regarding neutrophils?

Regards,

Ardavan
Sent from my iPad

[Irene de Villiers]

Dear Ardavan and all,
A misreading: The word "default" is nowhere in my writing. You missed what I was trying to explain somethig else as my next sentence was intended to show.....
I did say (and gave a refernece) that:
"It only works in a child with intact thymus, otherwise the neutrophils cannot do what they are suppsoed to do."
Good - so then there is no conflict. To further explain why I stress intact thymus (meaning a robust immune system) is neded for a normal defence of any kind to functoion in the face of an attack includign an EBV attack, the following is from my own work:

My own cobtribution to progress here is in the Innte Constitutional Type Health (ICT Health) system based on aiming homeopathy at the genetic makeup of the individual, as that is where the immune system is weak, whether due to inherited gees,, epigenetic switches (miasms) or acquired damage in their lifetime - the net result is a compromised immune system making hte individual susceptoble to such attacks as by EBV and other pathogenic onslaughts.

After all, EBV only causes problems in a minority or humans, despite there being 90% of people with antibodies to it. Those where it is NOT an issue are "more robust" in their immune system defences. The flu is the same - it does not automatically infect a perso exposed to it. Some are immune due to a robust immune system.
MY attention is on obtaining that robust immune system:
Robustness is discussed by Hahnemann in APH 141 especially the footnote.
He is talking about the robustness of health that happens to occur after healthy people do proving experiments.
My finding is that robustness of health increases most when the individual uses the remedy most aligned with their inherited trait set. (Innate Constitutional Type Set, ICT set) They then need not "prove" multiple remedies to get a robust health - as the ICT one will align perfectly with their set of inherited traits.

Aside: How it aligns, I am not sure - maybe there is an associated frequency of the remedy that is the same as the associated frequency of the inherited trait set. Whatever is comonm something aligns between an inherited trait set and one specific remedy.

There is one remedy for one inherited trait set, so that the use of that remedy increases the robustness of health of the individual in exactly the way Hahnemann describes in Aph 141.

Now where Hahnemann describes it, the individuals are healthy ones doing provings.
I find robustness increases when a healthy individual uses just their personal ICT aligned with their inherited trait set....not neding a whole lot of proving remedies to gain robustness.
BUT... and here's the important part:
I find that robustness increases using this ICT remedy whether the individual is healthy (as in proving cases where robustness is proved oon healthy individuals and this is proved by Hahnemann to increase robustness still further) BUT ALSO if there is a disease present it will ALSO work to improve robustness....even though the remedy is not chosen or directed against the disease.
Either way - in health or during disease presence - ICT Health works, and the IMMUNE system robustness increases.
The beauty of the system is that you can use it in diseases which have not yet triggered, or where there are practically no symptoms (as in EBV before it gets nasty) or in diseases that are very hard to help by simillim,ium approach, such as cancers and other skewed immune systemn diseases. Its BEST iuse is of course in increasing robustness during health, instead of waiting for a disease to also be present.
Since it works on an inherited trait set, you need no disease symptoms to select the remedy. You only need to know the inherited trait set to which the individual belongs.

It works in any species of course.

Hence it is my view and finding that matching a remedy to the inherited trait set, (ICT HEalth) WILL improve what Hahnemann calls robustness (also resistance etc, at he lists - implying immune system strength), whether or not the individual has a diseae at the time. The disease might have a different remedy as its simillimum. Using the Inherited trait set remedy (I call it ICT remedy) instead of a simillimum, causes robustness of the immune system, but does not address the disease. (Choose well when to use it over a simillimum therefore.)
However, if you can support the system during disease while doing this ICT Health, long enough to achieve that robust immune system, THEN the immune system will take over and get rid of the disease as any robust immune system is designed to do....and which it initially could not do, as it was at that time susceptible and not robust.

So this "ICT Health" which I have been researching and developing, is an alternative homeopathy system to the usual one of looking at disease symptoms and finding a simillimum against the disease symptoms as seen and expressed in that individual.
Instead "ICT HEalth" looks at inherited traits present for life, ignoring the disease, matches the remedy to the SET of inherited traits (there are discrete sets, it is not random, and each SET has a corresponding remedy) and use that ICT remedy in FIbonacci series. (It works well this way not other ways...kudo's to Joe for the F series which is essential to immune robustness by ICT Health) to build up the immune system so that it becomes Robust and able to defend the body as it is designed to do.
This thinking was behind my original sentence above concerning children with a healthy thymus (and robust immune system).

Ardavan, you kindly offered me the book to read. I shall decline that offer with thanks. I am interested, but my time is not readily available, I have too much on my plate for now.
My main interest is because I do believe that understanding the pathology is very important, even when using the ICT Health system, where the remedy is chosen without disease features. You still need to support the system during its use, and understanding the pathology is essential to that.

EBV is human hepes virus 4 - so you may ask why I care when I work in veterinary homeopathy research.
The reason is that canine lymphomas sometimes show an EBV like virus present. Only a minority of lymphomas - but lymphoma is especially prevalent and on the increase in some dogs, golden retrievers for example.

That golden labs are affected most - does not surprise me either. Through my genetics research (before I discovered homeopathy I worked in genetics) , it is clear that the red/cream gene (as in red/cream cats, and golden labs) is associated with a LACK of ability to easily handle toxins. This predisposes them to much more serious problems in diseases like cancer, FIP, and others where there is a toxic component involved, and they succumb more easily than individuals without a red/cream gene. (The cream is actually two genes, red plus a dilution gene - it is the red gene that is the issue for toxin handling inability. Redheads have the issue in any species, it is actually the same gene. The dilution gene, as also seen in grey via black gene plus dilution gene, or lilac via chocolate, etc, is not an issue).
To me this says - it is even more relevant to use ICT Health on those with a red gene - before they get ill.

Namaste,
Irene

--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[Irene de Villiers]

PS I meant to add:

If I had a dog with EBV-like lymphoma, I would be using ICT-Health approach and not simillimum approach, becasue THIS kind of pathogen specifically uses techniques to subvert the normal immune system....proving that the immune system itself is not robust.
SO despite all the variable symptoms and issues that arise when the immune system is defeated by a pathogenic process - it is really the immune system that needs attention and fixing. That will then do the job of overcoming the pathogenis issue, when robust, better than any other approach.
A simillimum seems to me does not address that so well. But ICT-Health approach does address it, head-on. (I have not had time to publish the results yet.) So then ICT-Health is best used IMO where the immune systerm is badly damaged - and is the main focus of the real attack (the symptoms being "side effects" of immune system attack rather than an expression of what was attacked) - as in many severe chronic diseases.

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[John Harvey]

Dear Irene,
Was it you who wrote, at 9:08 a.m. GMT, 21 Apr 2014:
“Th-1 cytokines are part of the FIRST line of defence again both acute and chronic conditions or invasions (including allergens, viruses, bacteria, parasites, cancers, dead body cells, whatever is unwanted). THe TH-1 cytokines direct thymus derived cells to destoy and/or remove these unwanted objects using various mechanisms according to what is unwanted. For example Killer cells attack cancer, and neutrophils and then macrophage engulf allergens, viruses, dead cells etc.
“This is normal Th-1 activity and will happen as lomg as the Thymus is healthy” [bold emphasis mine]
and
“In EBV, a small white cells called a neutrophil is sent to engulf it, and destroy it with internal toxin granules in neutrphils. Next step is for macrophage (lage white cells) to send a message to the neutrophil to die. The macrophages then act much like garbage trucks to collect and toss out the dead neutrophils with their tightly enclosed killed virus and toxins, before the neutrophil can get old (like more than twelve hrs old) and break and release toxins. THis works IF the thymus is intact”?
If that was you, wouldn't you say that Ardavan's summation of this -- that phagocytosis by neutrophils is part of the default mode of defence -- absolutely represents what you have written?
If you did not intend the above-quoted passages to convey that, given a healthy thymus, neutrophils will engulf the EBV, I wonder what you did mean it to convey. Could you please clarify?
The remainder of your discussion is very interesting, if not completely straightforward (which I'm sure it can't be if you're not to offer an entire tutorial on it). It's useful that you take care not to confuse this ICT approach with homoeopathy; thank you for that.
Cheers --
John