Hi Luise,
So far, all the viruses studied use a specific envelope protein (the
protein coat of the body of the virus) as its "key" to get into a
very specific type of cell in the body, and inside there it
multiplies. Seems like the virus's aim in life is to "go forth and
multiply".
(Except why then kill of the host?)
Anyway - different "clades" (varieties) of the virus will have
different envelope proteins and can thus enter different types of
cell to replicate themselves.
Blood cells seem to be the most popular cells for many pathogenic
viruses to use for replication, but they also use nerve cells in the
brain and in theory the envelope protein can code for whatever cell
the virus wants to go for.
So maybe germ cells are an option, but I see a disadvantage. Germ
cells are only useful to keep the virus alive and kicking and
replicating, if they are actively dividing and being passed on - and
most germ cells are not doing that, especially in humans whereas,
blood cells are growing and being replaced all the time, providing
more and more cells for viral replication use.
Examples:
FIPV virus (for "feline infectious peritonitis") has an envelope
protein that matches and gets it into the macrophage blood cells. It
replicates in macrophages, destroying the very cells needed to
overcome the illness. [Homeopathy somehow overcomes this and I assume
that cats who recover have the macrophages engulf the virus instead
of having the virus replicate in there.]
HIV uses another blood cell type, as the envelope protein is specific
to that cell type, but some versions of HIV-1 also use at least two
nerve cell types in the brain.
There may well be viruses with envelope protein keys for egg or sperm
- I have no idea. But - just for fun - let's pretend there are:
Say there is envelope protein for sperm. So the virus enters sperm,
replicates and attacks more sperm. So what? Most sperm are never used
in procreation so there is no inherited virus. those sperm that are
potential procreators have damaged DNA, which is unlikely to line up
well with the egg cell DNA, and thus it is questionable whether a
fetus can develop. Is that not too risky a method for a virus to stay
around and not go extinct?
A better way is to attack the cells of the gastro-intestinal
tract - and some do. FECoV is an example in cats. Probably every cat
has them - and there is lovely cross-contamination in the litter
tray. So there the virus gets to spread in the cat's system AND to
other cats as well. It causes a mild to severe diarrhea depending on
volume and level of gut health (most cats being non-symptomatic) - a
lovely situation for the virus as the host does not die, and more
hosts also are found.
So just from speculation alone - I would think the virus has a better
chance of log-term survival in cells like blood and gastric cells
than in reproductive ones - despite the theoretical maybe that the
DNA MIGHT line up to make a viable heritable virus.
Viruses are more likely IMO to get to the next generation during
pregnancy using the blood stream as a bus - as HIV and FIV do.
So far it is only the lentivirus subgroup of retroviruses - NOT all
retrovirusdes - that are known to have this RNA to DNA insertion
mechanism. Apparently it is lentiviruses alone that are currently
used in gene research and gene therapy. What they do is remove the
disease-causing gene from the lentivirus leaving just the envelope
protein, the RT gene and the integrase gene and replace the disease-
cauisng gene with a benign desirable gene (like one that is
genetically missing from the individual to be treated), inject the
virus, and HOPE that the new gene carried by the virus, will get
inserted into a suitable place in the DNA to add a new gene that they
want there. This is also how they genetically modify our food to add
for example, an insecticide protein to the DNA in place of a disease
gene. So all such food is basically insecticide-contaminated food.
Well the fact that cats with FIV have the FIV gene in their DNA, and
come right with homeopathy, is testament to the power of homeopathy
to undo this problem - somehow. Since homeopaths and allopathic
geneticists do not work hand in hand, there is no research to look at
what the DNA is up to before, during or after homeopathy. A pity.
We can again only theorize:
Does homeopathy switch off the gene by methylating it?
Does it switch on an aggressive alternate gene by acetylation?
Does it remove the unwanted DNA? (I find this hard to believe but
then I also found RNA insertion in DNA hard to believe)
Does it build resistance to gene entry of new cells (resistance to
the envelope protein) and wait for the infected ones to die a natural
death (as blood cells have a limited life span) ?
My work in FIP as an example:
We know from allopathy that cats with FIP have a very low
Interleukin-2 and thus very ineffective macrophage response. We also
know from allopathy that the FIPV replicates in macrophages and we
know from Leishmania research that
Macrophages that are not working, live 100 days and those that are
working (engulfing invaders) live between 8 hrs and 4 days.
So let's see how that lines p with homeopathy response:
From homeopathy, of those that recover, the great majority do so in
about 2 to 3 weeks, maybe a month at most (though very few take
longer and still recover). Two to 4 weeks however, is a very short
time compared with the usual macrophage turnaround time of 100 days,
and recovered cats so far NEVER relapse. [First recovery was early
2003].
Unfortunately no allopath has tested the recovered ones for
Il-2 but it is evident from their health status and response to
subsequent health challenges that there is nothing wrong with their
Il-2 and their macrophage function after recovery.
So to me this speed of response suggests that the most likely
homeopathy response is that macrophages that are so far not under
virus replication usage, become resistant to virus entry - resistant
to the envelope protein. Just a guess:-)
To me - the fact that provers of remedies become resistant to
diseases the remedies could cure - is further evidence that
homeopathy works by building resistance to attack. It's why after
homeopathy for ear infections (as an example), bacteria do not enter
cells to attack them any more, and so there is no recurrence of the
infection.
[We also know from FIV research that there is a specific protein
involved in making cell surfaces resistant to pathogen entry.
But it is new stuff and the mechanism is unclear.]
What is amazing to me is that homeopathy cures in ALL mechanisms of
disease or damage
Somehow:-)
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."
