Dr De MeirLeir's presentation and a question

[globalpilot]

http://www.gc-maf.de/en/gcmaf-treatment-for-mecfs.html

THis is a presentation given by Dr DeMeirLeir in the fall of 2011 I believe.

In it, he says that both LPS and GCMAF activate macrophages. However, only 1 can be activated. And that by supplementing GCMAF, LPS won't be able to activate macrophages.

Is there not a risk than , that by taking GCMaf, the immune system will not react to the LPS ?

GP

 

[Sushi]

http://www.gc-maf.de/en/gcmaf-treatment-for-mecfs.html

THis is a presentation given by Dr DeMeirLeir in the fall of 2011 I believe.

In it, he says that both LPS and GCMAF activate macrophages. However, only 1 can be activated. And that by supplementing GCMAF, LPS won't be able to activate macrophages.

Is there not a risk than , that by taking GCMaf, the immune system will not react to the LPS ?

GP

Hi GP,

I think what he said was that both LPS and GcMAF can activate macrophages and that GcMAF will "win the contest" over LPS. Also, that it wasn't good for LPS to activate macrophages so that by taking GcMAF you override the "damaging" effect of LPS activating them.

Obviously this is "layman talk," but I think this is what he means.

Best,
Sushi

 

[globalpilot]

Thanks Sushi, What I am puzzled about then is -> are the LPS not inactivated then ? They are very damaging themselves, so if they don't activate teh immune system, will it just ignore them and let them roam free ?

GP

Hi GP,

I think what he said was that both LPS and GcMAF can activate macrophages and that GcMAF will "win the contest" over LPS. Also, that it wasn't good for LPS to activate macrophages so that by taking GcMAF you override the "damaging" effect of LPS activating them.

Obviously this is "layman talk," but I think this is what he means.

Best,
Sushi

 

[alex3619]

Hi, I summarized the talk briefly on a blog here:

http://forums.phoenixrising.me/entr...enny-De-Meirlier-at-Mt-Sinai-in-NY-on-11-2011

Bye, Alex

 

[globalpilot]

Thanks Alex. When you say "So competitive inhibition of LPS activation occurs" are you saying that GCMAF also inhibits LPS ?

Also, is REDLABS in Belgium the only lab that measures SCD14 ? Anyone in the US or Canada know ?

GlobalPilot

E=alex3619;255724]Hi, I summarized the talk briefly on a blog here:

http://forums.phoenixrising.me/entr...enny-De-Meirlier-at-Mt-Sinai-in-NY-on-11-2011

Bye, Alex[/QUOTE]

 

[Sushi]

Hi, I summarized the talk briefly on a blog here:

http://forums.phoenixrising.me/entr...enny-De-Meirlier-at-Mt-Sinai-in-NY-on-11-2011

Bye, Alex

Hi Alex,

Anecdotally, my high soluble CD14 (and implied high LPS) has normalized after about 9 months of GcMAF.

Best wishes,
Sushi

 

[Daffodil]

great news!!!!

sushi....do you know what sort of maintenance dose they are using with gcmaf once a person is well?

it wasnt meant to be taken forever..so its a little concerning to me.... i wish they would find a pathogen

thanks
xoxox

 

[globalpilot]

Isn't it nice to have some markers now to follow ? Sushi, are you feeling much better without all that LPS and teh immune response taht follows.

 

[Sushi]

great news!!!!

sushi....do you know what sort of maintenance dose they are using with gcmaf once a person is well?

it wasnt meant to be taken forever..so its a little concerning to me.... i wish they would find a pathogen

thanks
xoxox

Daff,

No one really knows how long it was "meant to be taken." Even the maintenance doses are in the realm of experimental. Different patients are given different doses when different markers are reached. It is too early yet to have the protocol down pat.

Sushi

 

[Sushi]

Isn't it nice to have some markers now to follow ? Sushi, are you feeling much better without all that LPS and teh immune response taht follows.

I am feeling about 30% better and should feel "more better" when the inflammation fully dies down. I can't say it is this or that that makes the difference. Probably the whole treatment.

Best,
Sushi

 

[alex3619]

Thanks Alex. When you say "So competitive inhibition of LPS activation occurs" are you saying that GCMAF also inhibits LPS ?

Competitive inhibition occurs when a substrate (chemical) occupies the place another chemical could be. GcMAF will not directly lower LPS, but it prevents the LPS from having a major effect by occupying the place LPS would be. It has a higher affinity for the receptor - which means it grabs hold better and doesn't like to let go. The LPS has fewer receptors to bind to as a result. Think of LPS as a weedy troublemaker who wants to get into the club, and GcMAF as a seven foot tall bodybuilder who is standing in the doorway. At least, that is how I interpret what KDM said. I don't have independent information on this. Bye, Alex