Choline on the Brain? A Guide to Choline in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Enterovirus 71 Antibodies Found Cross-Reactive to Brain Tissue. Also True for ME/CFS Enteroviruses?

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Hip, Sep 20, 2016.

  1. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Enterovirus 71 infection, although often asymptomatic or mild, occasionally causes severe neurological symptoms such as meningitis, encephalitis, and poliomyelitis-like paralysis. This virus tends to appear in epidemics that affect children.

    The mechanism by which this virus can cause neurological destruction is not well understood, so the authors of the following study set out to see if IgG antibodies induced by enterovirus 71 infection might be cross-reactive to proteins in the brain tissue:

    The cross-reactivity of the enterovirus 71 to human brain tissue and identification of the cross-reactivity related fragments. Feb 2010.

    They found that in mice, enterovirus 71 seems induce IgG antibodies that can target the tissues of the cerebrum. What's more, these antibodies were able to cross the blood-brain barrier and enter the brain.

    I wonder if something similar might happen with the enteroviruses associated with ME/CFS, namely coxsackievirus B and echovirus. Could these be inducing IgG antibodies that cross-react with brain tissue, thereby leading to ME/CFS symptoms?

    @Jonathan Edwards, this looks to be the molecular mimicry-type model of autoimmune attack, which you generally do not support; so it would be good to have your views on the above study.
    Justin30 and actup like this.
  2. frederic83

    frederic83 Senior Member

    Dr Chia talked about a Danish scientific paper that should be published soon (?) about Parkinson's and enterovirus 71 or CVB-4. These virus would travel through the vagus nerve and infect the brain. Here, this is a different mechanism that is based on enterovirus 71 antibodies damaging the brain.
    Hip likes this.
  3. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards "Gibberish"

    The paper is not of a sufficient technical standard to make anything of the data. Several sentences indicate that the authors do not really understand what they are doing. The staining looks mostly like non-specific background matrix and nuclear staining. You can get staining with any serum you like if you leave it on long enough. To be of an value immunohistochemistry needs to be much more carefully performed and described. The use of peptides to generate antisera is inappropriate since antibody responses are to whole proteins, not peptides. I could go on but basically this is not something I would have recommended for publication.
    Jackb23, aaron_c and Hip like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page