Re: A "Wormy" Apple A Day Keeps the Doctor Away!

Good,Dr.
Why I don't understand is why the alternative medical community don't apply the immune concept when they offer solution to CRC ??

CRC is an immune problem. It is absolutely clear and was demonstrated by medical studies and patient data found by the pioneer researchers dealing with this syndrome.

Why the treatment they offer aren't focused in immune restoration ? There are supplements and treatments that help to balance the immune system increasing T cell response and breaking the immune tolerance to the yeast.

Why candida sufferers aren't informed that the main mechanism that fails when they acquire this syndrome is the immunologic defense against candida albicans, instead, they are managed to think that secondary protection mechanisms such as the antagonistic flora is the main cause of this syndrome.

Why the sufferers who participate in candida forums think that CRC is caused by the germination of candida albicans ?

Who has been in charge of spreading this barbarism ?

Why they don't know that yeast in any form produce metabolites and by-products that are responsible for the neuro-endocrine symptoms candida sufferers feel ?

Why they don't know that the remote organs are affected by candida metabolites and no by the presence of the yeast cells ?

There is a huge amount of miss-information, myths, and unproved treatments diffused in the web that are prolonging the suffering and keeping the sufferers going around them in a vicious cycle for years.

It is time for people to wake up !

I haven't seen any explanation such as these fragments in any alternative medicine website :

Chronic antigenemia, occurring naturally or
induced experimentally, may result in immunologic
unresponsiveness to specific
antigens, including those of infectious origin.
Antigens that evoke a normal immune response
initially may induce immunologic tolerance
when antigenic exposure becomes of the
quantity and duration critical to its
establishment. With its immunologic defenses
neutralized, the host becomes incapable of
eliminating from its tissues the source of
tolerizing antigen, insuring perpetuation of the
compromised immune response and persistence
in the tissues of the infectious agent.
Total loss of immune capability is suggested
by the terms "immunologic paralysis" and
"immunologic unresponsiveness"; "immunologic
tolerance" may perhaps better describe a
continuing but ineffectual immune response that
"tolerates" rather than rejects the organism. The
"ebb and flow" in the opposing forces of foreign
invasion and immune rejection is reflected
clinically in the remissions and exacerbations
characteristic of many chronic illnesses. The
incompleteness of "paralysis" is suggested by
fluctuations both in clinical manifestations and
in such simple tests of normal immune activity
as the white blood cell count, skin test response,
body temperature, and antibody titer, as well as
by the inconstancy of indicators of abnormal
immunologic activity, e.g., immune complex
deposition, RA factor, LE cell, ANA. The
pattern of the clinical response may undergo
constant change as the immune system reacts
both normally and abnormally to the qualitative
and quantitative variations in antigenic
stimulation.
Persistence of Candida albicans in the tissues
for prolonged periods typifies these principles.
Chronic symptoms representing systemic
responses to soluble yeast products accompany
manifestations referable to the infected sites.
Both fluctuate according to the effectiveness of a
weakened immune response that is often
influenced by factors directly favorable to yeast
growth.

People can become
unresponsive to an antigen by exposing them more or
less continually to this antigen. This may be carried
out with very high doses of antigen—called "highzone
tolerance"—or with very low doses, "lowzone
tolerance." High-zone tolerance tends to
render unresponsive both T- and B-cells, whereas
low-zone tolerance weakens or blocks the T-cell
response only. Thus the cellular immune response
(T-cell) is more easily blocked, and such blockage
is easier to sustain than is the humoral (B-cell)
response. Furthermore, unresponsiveness (or
"tolerance") is easier to induce with soluble than
with aggregated antigens.
Thus immunologic tolerance is most readily
achieved by more or less continual exposure to a
soluble antigen, with T-cell paralysis being much
easier to achieve and sustain.
When mucous membranes are chronically infected
by yeast, cells of the immune system are exposed
continually to Candida antigens, thus satisfying the
conditions for tolerance induction. This weakened
immunologic response allows the yeast to thrive in
the tissues, and a vicious cycle is established. An
analagous situation has been reported in
lepromatous leprosy. In this, the widely
disseminated form of leprosy, impairment of the
immune response has been demonstrated in vivo by
reversion to negative of the lepromin skin test, and
in vitro both by impairment of the lymphocyte
transformation test on exposure to the leprosy
bacillus or phytohemagglu-tinin, and release of the
migration inhibitory factor on exposure to the
bacillus. In the tuberculoid form of leprosy,
however, this does not occur. This is the localized
form of the disease, which carries a good
prognosis. Thus widespread involvement is
associated with impairment of the immune
response.
With Candida infection, as with leprosy, there
may be for each individual a critical point beyond
which the total area of involvement is such that the
antigenic stimulus paralyzes rather than stimulates
the immune system, particularly the T-cell compartment.
Until this state of immunologic
unresponsiveness is broken, drug therapy of the
yeast infection will be less than fully effective.










Tweet