Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Digestive Health Support Forum banner
1 - 20 of 139 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Comment: _____________________________________"I believe that Mike believes that food plays a major role in inciting the gut's immune system and the immune system magnifies this by responding inappropriately to food." _____________________________________On the contrary I merely have studied the findings of real scientists, of which I am not one, which confirm the validity of the integrative model of the roles of the CNS, ENS and IRS in IBS.Belief denotes an act of faith. There is no faith involved in the extensive work along these lines. there is ample hard evidence, clinically an investigatory, that not only can the IRS be activated in ISb by the CNS and ENS but immunologically and non-immunologically as well independent of CNS and ENS factors...the IRS can and does serve in IBS patientrs as the origin of the upregulation of the CNS and ENS.The question remains as to how to isolate whether there are specific subpopulations which are characterized by one system being primary, or does the primary mechanism vary within each patient from time to time depending upon the provoking stimulus.At least science is far enough along now to know that all (3) are ionvolved!! This is a big step.There is a diagram, Figure 1, in the following article which anyone can "click on" then print out and look at. It illustrates the interrdependency of these systems in the process of elicitng IBS symptoms. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/u...36.2001.00951.x The part that is missing is the activation of the IRS circulating cells (lymphocytes, granulocyte classes, macrophages and platelets) in IBS which has been confirmed by "real scientists" who isolate and challenge the small bowel with various dietary componenets then assess inflammatory response, and those who study circulating immunocyte response in vitro...absent input from the CNS and ENS. By capturing IRS activators which function independent of the input of the CNS and ENS, one shows that the "third leg of the stool" is active and this of course explains why the response of the non-mast cell immunocytes can be duplicated in vitro.If you take the diagram and draw a line between the 2 boxes that connect the NON IgE mechanisms in the way the author separated them (IgG[x] subclasses vs OTHER Non IgE mechanisms) and then extaned that line down to the MEDIATOR RELEASE box, the picture is then complete for the sum total of what is known so far about the interraction between the IRS ENS and CNS in IBS.If one chooses to ignore part of the information and only look at that which suits that person then of course they will only see and acknowledge part of the integrated dynamics.Thankfully the investigation into the key role of proinflammtory activation in IBS is not being conducted solely by one group and from one perspective. Since some European scientists have been wise enough to study the small bowel immune response diretly, they have been able to confirm what has already been known since 1979: that certain dietary components, which vary from patient to patient, will provoke a proinflammtory reaction within the sructures of the small bowel IN THE ABSENCE of specific circulating antibodies to that food, and thus precipitate the symptoms of diarrheaic type and cyclic type symptom sets of so-called IBS.The mechanisms are well documented in numeraous places, and if one makes a serious study of the literature on the subject absent selective thinking then one would be aware of these mechanisms. No one in that portion of the scientific community which works with non-allergenic food intolerances is so uneducated and naive and simple-minded as to base their conclusions on mere cause-effect observations. If the literature were actually studied such a silly statement would not have been made.To not do so by a non-healthcare provider is a matter of personal choice which bears no ill consequence to anybody accept those who may attribute some credibility to that prsons' denouncements, and then manage their treatment program accordingly. In a healthcare providers case, to ignore and not intergate that understanding into the recommended care and clinical management of patients would be to fall short of a professional obligation to excellence and ethics.Some folks read the published material, books, studies and tutorials provided by doctors and scientists who have both studied this area and cared for patients in this manner successfully. Some do not. So posts like this thread contains reflects the opinion of those who chose not to, or are unable to. The rendering of that opinion does not render the information false. True and false ar characteristics of speech not of tangible things. In this case we are talking about tangible phsyiologic events, therefore no true or false can exist, only the fact that they do occur regardless of opinion or assertion to the contrary by the ill-informed.When one constructs a patient care program accordingly for patients wherein the reactions do occur, the program is successful as measured by outcomes proportionate to the degree of patient compliance. ________________________________"I do not see the point of these public disagreements elsewhere on this board as it serves no purpose in helping anyone." ________________________________I respect your view, yet disagree. On the contrary if there is information pertinent to the welfare of the sick, and the information is not shared, then it is to the detriment of the sick. Based upon what the sick ofetn experience by way of available education as to the causal basis to their condition this may be the only venue by which they can see certain expanded, integrative and contrary views and understandings expressed.In the process of discovery in advancements in medicine, since this process involves humans, it also involves human nature and all that this entails. Therefore here and elsewhere (right up to the entertaining shouting matches and denouncements in Q&A sessions at medical conferences which become "lively") this is bound to occur as part of the process of moving from the ill-defined "syndrome" phase or "idiopathic" phase of some condition into the eventual place where the "disease" and "cause" become fully understood.Since that process always occurs, here or elsewhere, in an environment where any other persons involvement is voluntary, if the discussion displeases you "change the channel", in this case exit the discussion, and don't read it.Everyone does that every day, as there are some things which interest some and some things which do not. Sometimes a sense of fascination sets in...like at a car wreck. On the one hand it offends a persons psyche yet they feel compelled to observe and observe and observe. So it must perform some function and hold some form of interest for the person whose attention lingers over the incident, no?
________________________________ "At the end of the day we should all be united in helping each other as much as we can with good factual advice or just listening to others and offering support whoever we are and wherever we come from." _________________________________We are, regardless of the fact that the practitioners some of us work with posess differign views and follow differnt treatment methods. Each person acts in what he or she belives (I hope) is in the best interests of the patients here.This is all part of that process, yet still we may not all agree as to what parts of the process we each think are useful and which are not. That is because we all value different things. Use that which you value and discard that you do not. A natural reaction. Conversely one persons poison may be anothers' revelation of understanding. __________________________________"Please keep this stuff to yourselves guys if you don't mind me saying and have a private argument." ___________________________________One persons argument is anothers tutorial. If you do not like it do not read it and you won't then be bothered. Sometimes we all look at things and say "See? At least I don't do that!!". So whose voice is that self-talking when we think that and then express it... _________________________________"I offer this in peace and hope that neither of you are not offended, that is not my intention. " ___________________________________
I know.
I am not.
____________________________________"The other reason is probably because for the most part there is nothing to discover. That is, it may be for a very few people diagnosed with IBS there is something involved with food but for the vast majority it is not the case (as Mike wants us to believe)." _____________________________________Mike does not suggest "beleif" as this is an act of faith. there is no faith-based component to whatI have learned from the doctors and dieticians I work with.The majority of patients who suffer d-predominanat and cyclic symptoms sets can and do suffer provocation of onset of symptosm by dietary compnenets. Done properly this can be duplicated in vivo and in vitro and their dieta djusted accordinlgy to reduce or eliminate sympotms. There are at least (8) known immunologic and non-immunologic mechanisms, which are also non-ENS and CNS mechanisms, by which this can occur. The markers of many have been recovered directly from the GI tract.Irrespective of which of the Immunologic, Non Immunologic, CNS or ENS mechanisms which can and do influence the activation of the IRS; regardless of which can be isolated as a primary "arming mechanism" in a given subject (rendering the other mechanisms secondary or amplificatory), it has been shown over and over again since at least 1955 (with the best work beginning in 1979 or so) that in AT LEAST the 2/3 of IBS patients a partial, dose-dependent loss of oral tolerance to harmless food components and/or chemical additives occurs as compared to asymptomatic people. Thus the introduction of certain provoking foods, beyond those which cause pseudoallegry or direct chemotoxicity, provokes symptoms reliably. This is absent any comorbid food allergy. It is a fact that the identification and removal of thise specific substsnces from the diet reduces or eliminates the patients symptoms. Fact.In spite of the fact that scientists have not only been isolating the markers of neurologic activity in IBS but the markers of immunologic and alternative-pathway IRS activation in the small bowel of IBS victims the most recent 25 years or so, right up to recovering proof of, for example, specific lymphocytic activation in response to dietary components as well as local IgE in the small bowel specific to the dietary components that provoke the symptoms, lay people and practitioners alike continue to perpetuate the myth that this is illusory. Its kind of funny since the very chemicals which upregulate the ENS and CNS are released into the gut parenchyma and systemic circulatiion in these reactions...yet when they are isolated they are simply ignored as they do not fit "the model" perhaps someone invented elsewhere.Not an unusual practice when syndromes are studied from differeing perspectives that the owner of the one perspective should not acknowledge the validity of those whose work comes from an alternative perspective. Eventually the collective medical community gets past it and integrates all the knowledge. It is not there yet and that is reflected in what trickles down to and through non-healthcare professionals. ___________________________________"The gut normally has responses to what is put in it. In IBS, these responses appear to be abnormally exaggerated, leaving one to believe incorrectly that what is put in is the culprit rather its simply being the temperamental nature of the "IBS gut". " ____________________________________Sadly for the reader of this disinformation, the first statement is of course correct as it is the grosseest possible generality. The books I recommend would elucidate this process in detail.The second "action-response-conclusion" thinking indeed could be said of both investigatory ad diagnostic approaches....symptom based and causal alike. One observes a specific neurologic "event" and, not having quantified whether there is the prior presence of some chemical mediator (endogenous or exogenous) which would account for the neuolgic event, presumes and postulates the mechanism at work. Someone reads the posulate and infers fact. The inferred fact is implicated in reptition and thus becomes fact by acclimation. I see that in the IBS "research" done by many in the United States all the time, and then how it is explained here in foruims like this to patients hungry for information.In the case of food elements provoking the local inflammatory response in the small bowel at least the first step is accomplished that the scientists studying the allergologic and immunologic aspects of the syndrome have been espousing since it was first documented lo these many years. That is at least finally everyone acknowledges that (at keast in these 2 populations) some weird inflammatory reaction (which is not a measurable food "allergy" reaction by conventional means) does occur, and an array of inflammtory mediators are released in the small bowel which can upregualte sensory and motor function.Just 18 months ago most the majority of "IBS investigators" and GI docs in the USA were denouncing such mechanisms as non existent ("there is NO inflammtory response involved in IBS" was the dogma). That claim was posted loudly and often in IBS self help communities as well, including here, as recemtly as 6 months ago in spite of the fact it has been known to be incorrect for 20 years.Now, since it has also been well known physiologically since, say, 1979, that prostaglandins produced in proinflammatory reations in the gut and other forms of tissue and serotonin released in the same fashion upregulate bowel functiona and cause diarrhea....all of a sudden the persons who made these proclamation of folly have begun debating "ownership" of this weird IRS activation...CNS/Stress...ENS/Stress....Immunologic mechanisms. what an incredible laugh, and so typical of what I have had the dubious privilege of watching time and time again over the last 30 years.
To cut to the chase, It is just a stupid argument since it is self evident from an integrative view that the systems are fully interractive, codependent, and can be armed by specific mechanisms which can be sourced to each of the systems in question depending upon the patient and circumstance. AND it is obvious that there are subpopulatons where each is going to be found to be true vis a vis what is the primary arming mechanism after which the IRS can be provoked.Since, however, so far at LEAST IgE (mast cells, basophils) and T-lymphocyte arming mechanisms which are "immunologic" (and the circulating immuncoytes themselves ecrutied to the lamina propria) have been isolated along with the non-immunologic mechanisms, to suggest that the IRS activation by dietary components is not an etiologic mechanism of the proven loss of oral tolerance, rather it is somethng I have personally cooked up and deluded myself and others into beleiving (along with thousands of patients who have benefittted from this misbelief), well, said kindly this is simply an obsolete theory as it has been disproved. Get over it.When the scientists findings who have done this most recent work is added to the mix sometime in the coming year, along with a new medical text on Food Allergy and Intolerance written by experts in that field of medicine is published this year, these errors hopefully can be overcome and another step at integrating all the knowledge can be accomplished.Ohh yeah...I referenced the 1970's as a time of evolving understanding of proinflammatory mediators role in gut motility...a couple oldies from that time which illustrates what I mean by early steps towards understanding: ____________________"Lancet 1978 Apr 29;1(8070):906-8Prostaglandin-synthesis inhibitors in prophylaxis of food intolerance. Buisseret PD, Youlten LF, Heinzelmann DI, Lessof MH Prophylactic doses of aspirin, indomethacin, or ibuprofen prevented symptoms of food intolerance in five out of six patients who on several occasions had had acute gastrointestinal symptoms after the ingestion of specific foodstuffs. Blood and stool prostaglandin E2 and F2alpha concentrations during unprotected challenge were consistent with the idea that these symptoms were mediated through prostaglandin release. Prostaglandin-synthetase inhibitors may benefit some patients with specific food intolerance who are unable or unwilling to avoid the offending food. ___________________________: World J Surg 1979 Sep 20;3(5):565-78Prostaglandins and serotonin: nonpeptide diarrheogenic hormones.Jaffe BM.Prostaglandins and serotonin are vasoactive compounds with profound effects on the gastrointestinal tract. Both cause inhibition of gastric acid secretion (although serotonin stimulates gastric pepsin secretion), stimulation of intestinal motility, and conversion of small intestinal mucosa from absorption to secretion of water and electrolytes. Their effects on pancreatic and biliary function are still not clear. Although prostaglandins appear to elicit their effects primarily by a paracrine mode of action, and serotonin is primarily a neurotransmitter (neurocrine), it is clear that even under normal conditions both can function as humoral agents. For example, we have shown that serotonin plays a physiologic role as a humoral inhibitor of gastric acid secretion. However, the effects of these agents become more pronounced in patients with humorally mediated diarrheogenic syndromes. Serotonin (and related indoles, particularly 5-hydroxytryptophan) has been firmly implicated as a cause of diarrhea in patients with carcinoid syndrome; our recent studies suggest that the diagnosis can be more effectively made by measuring circulating immunoreactive serotonin concentrations than urinary excretion of 5-HIAA; that some circulating serotonin escapes hepatic inactivation and, thus, large intestinal tumors can cause carcinoid syndrome in the absence of hepatic metastases; and that large amounts of serotonin are produced by some noncarcinoid diarrheogenic tumors, including medullary carcinomas of the thyroid and tumors associated with the WDHA syndrome. A large number of tumors of probable neural crest origin, including medullary thyroid carcinoma, carcinoids, and tumors associated with the WDHA syndrome, secrete large amounts of prostaglandins, particularly PGE2. The clinical response of at least some of the patients harboring these tumors to inhibitors of prostaglandin synthesis (particularly indomethacin) suggests that prostaglandins play a role in the etiology of these diarrheogenic syndromes.Publication Types: � Review _______________________________________Adv Prostaglandin Thromboxane Res 1980;8:1627-31 An approach to evaluation of local intestinal PG production and clinical assessment of its inhibition by indomethacin in chronic diarrhea. Bukhave K, Rask-Madsen J No abstract ON LINE..Summary of Findings:The connection between gut motility and prostaglandin release was studied. PGE2 levels in the jejunal secretions IBS patients were elevated in 10 of 17 (59%) with cyclic IBS (D & C) and in "gluten enteropathy". Six IBS patients treated with indomethacin (INDOCIN: non-steroidal analgesic anti-inflammatory which works by inhibiting prostaglandins, which are inflammatory and pain mediators of various types) had a 50% reduction in stool volume and frequency. And withdrawal of the indocin caused the symptoms to return.Due to the absence of indicators of Type I inflammatory-allergic response, the authors state the findings suggested localized or gut-wall reactions . ___________________________Later they went on to study cromolyn sodium instead as an imunomdulator and got results in up to 95% of the subjects stduied depending upon dose and selection criterion.Anyway, just a couple of early examples of specific mediator assay and relationships in non-alergenic gut reactivity and symptom provocation. there's about 100 pages more abstracts on the subject since.The gut does not have a temperemental "nature" in IBS. The upregulation of the local and central structures, muscular and neurologic, along the "brain-gut axis" have biochemical basis, the total of which is yet to be fully elucidated, but it can be seen thus far that, like many other syndromes, it is not going to turn out to be some idiopathic mystery as was once believed not so long ago.Eat well. Think well. Be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Comment: _____________________________________"I believe that Mike believes that food plays a major role in inciting the gut's immune system and the immune system magnifies this by responding inappropriately to food." _____________________________________On the contrary I merely have studied the findings of real scientists, of which I am not one, which confirm the validity of the integrative model of the roles of the CNS, ENS and IRS in IBS.Belief denotes an act of faith. There is no faith involved in the extensive work along these lines. there is ample hard evidence, clinically an investigatory, that not only can the IRS be activated in ISb by the CNS and ENS but immunologically and non-immunologically as well independent of CNS and ENS factors...the IRS can and does serve in IBS patientrs as the origin of the upregulation of the CNS and ENS.The question remains as to how to isolate whether there are specific subpopulations which are characterized by one system being primary, or does the primary mechanism vary within each patient from time to time depending upon the provoking stimulus.At least science is far enough along now to know that all (3) are ionvolved!! This is a big step.There is a diagram, Figure 1, in the following article which anyone can "click on" then print out and look at. It illustrates the interrdependency of these systems in the process of elicitng IBS symptoms. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/u...36.2001.00951.x The part that is missing is the activation of the IRS circulating cells (lymphocytes, granulocyte classes, macrophages and platelets) in IBS which has been confirmed by "real scientists" who isolate and challenge the small bowel with various dietary componenets then assess inflammatory response, and those who study circulating immunocyte response in vitro...absent input from the CNS and ENS. By capturing IRS activators which function independent of the input of the CNS and ENS, one shows that the "third leg of the stool" is active and this of course explains why the response of the non-mast cell immunocytes can be duplicated in vitro.If you take the diagram and draw a line between the 2 boxes that connect the NON IgE mechanisms in the way the author separated them (IgG[x] subclasses vs OTHER Non IgE mechanisms) and then extaned that line down to the MEDIATOR RELEASE box, the picture is then complete for the sum total of what is known so far about the interraction between the IRS ENS and CNS in IBS.If one chooses to ignore part of the information and only look at that which suits that person then of course they will only see and acknowledge part of the integrated dynamics.Thankfully the investigation into the key role of proinflammtory activation in IBS is not being conducted solely by one group and from one perspective. Since some European scientists have been wise enough to study the small bowel immune response diretly, they have been able to confirm what has already been known since 1979: that certain dietary components, which vary from patient to patient, will provoke a proinflammtory reaction within the sructures of the small bowel IN THE ABSENCE of specific circulating antibodies to that food, and thus precipitate the symptoms of diarrheaic type and cyclic type symptom sets of so-called IBS.The mechanisms are well documented in numeraous places, and if one makes a serious study of the literature on the subject absent selective thinking then one would be aware of these mechanisms. No one in that portion of the scientific community which works with non-allergenic food intolerances is so uneducated and naive and simple-minded as to base their conclusions on mere cause-effect observations. If the literature were actually studied such a silly statement would not have been made.To not do so by a non-healthcare provider is a matter of personal choice which bears no ill consequence to anybody accept those who may attribute some credibility to that prsons' denouncements, and then manage their treatment program accordingly. In a healthcare providers case, to ignore and not intergate that understanding into the recommended care and clinical management of patients would be to fall short of a professional obligation to excellence and ethics.Some folks read the published material, books, studies and tutorials provided by doctors and scientists who have both studied this area and cared for patients in this manner successfully. Some do not. So posts like this thread contains reflects the opinion of those who chose not to, or are unable to. The rendering of that opinion does not render the information false. True and false ar characteristics of speech not of tangible things. In this case we are talking about tangible phsyiologic events, therefore no true or false can exist, only the fact that they do occur regardless of opinion or assertion to the contrary by the ill-informed.When one constructs a patient care program accordingly for patients wherein the reactions do occur, the program is successful as measured by outcomes proportionate to the degree of patient compliance. ________________________________"I do not see the point of these public disagreements elsewhere on this board as it serves no purpose in helping anyone." ________________________________I respect your view, yet disagree. On the contrary if there is information pertinent to the welfare of the sick, and the information is not shared, then it is to the detriment of the sick. Based upon what the sick ofetn experience by way of available education as to the causal basis to their condition this may be the only venue by which they can see certain expanded, integrative and contrary views and understandings expressed.In the process of discovery in advancements in medicine, since this process involves humans, it also involves human nature and all that this entails. Therefore here and elsewhere (right up to the entertaining shouting matches and denouncements in Q&A sessions at medical conferences which become "lively") this is bound to occur as part of the process of moving from the ill-defined "syndrome" phase or "idiopathic" phase of some condition into the eventual place where the "disease" and "cause" become fully understood.Since that process always occurs, here or elsewhere, in an environment where any other persons involvement is voluntary, if the discussion displeases you "change the channel", in this case exit the discussion, and don't read it.Everyone does that every day, as there are some things which interest some and some things which do not. Sometimes a sense of fascination sets in...like at a car wreck. On the one hand it offends a persons psyche yet they feel compelled to observe and observe and observe. So it must perform some function and hold some form of interest for the person whose attention lingers over the incident, no?
________________________________ "At the end of the day we should all be united in helping each other as much as we can with good factual advice or just listening to others and offering support whoever we are and wherever we come from." _________________________________We are, regardless of the fact that the practitioners some of us work with posess differign views and follow differnt treatment methods. Each person acts in what he or she belives (I hope) is in the best interests of the patients here.This is all part of that process, yet still we may not all agree as to what parts of the process we each think are useful and which are not. That is because we all value different things. Use that which you value and discard that you do not. A natural reaction. Conversely one persons poison may be anothers' revelation of understanding. __________________________________"Please keep this stuff to yourselves guys if you don't mind me saying and have a private argument." ___________________________________One persons argument is anothers tutorial. If you do not like it do not read it and you won't then be bothered. Sometimes we all look at things and say "See? At least I don't do that!!". So whose voice is that self-talking when we think that and then express it... _________________________________"I offer this in peace and hope that neither of you are not offended, that is not my intention. " ___________________________________
I know.
I am not.
____________________________________"The other reason is probably because for the most part there is nothing to discover. That is, it may be for a very few people diagnosed with IBS there is something involved with food but for the vast majority it is not the case (as Mike wants us to believe)." _____________________________________Mike does not suggest "beleif" as this is an act of faith. there is no faith-based component to whatI have learned from the doctors and dieticians I work with.The majority of patients who suffer d-predominanat and cyclic symptoms sets can and do suffer provocation of onset of symptosm by dietary compnenets. Done properly this can be duplicated in vivo and in vitro and their dieta djusted accordinlgy to reduce or eliminate sympotms. There are at least (8) known immunologic and non-immunologic mechanisms, which are also non-ENS and CNS mechanisms, by which this can occur. The markers of many have been recovered directly from the GI tract.Irrespective of which of the Immunologic, Non Immunologic, CNS or ENS mechanisms which can and do influence the activation of the IRS; regardless of which can be isolated as a primary "arming mechanism" in a given subject (rendering the other mechanisms secondary or amplificatory), it has been shown over and over again since at least 1955 (with the best work beginning in 1979 or so) that in AT LEAST the 2/3 of IBS patients a partial, dose-dependent loss of oral tolerance to harmless food components and/or chemical additives occurs as compared to asymptomatic people. Thus the introduction of certain provoking foods, beyond those which cause pseudoallegry or direct chemotoxicity, provokes symptoms reliably. This is absent any comorbid food allergy. It is a fact that the identification and removal of thise specific substsnces from the diet reduces or eliminates the patients symptoms. Fact.In spite of the fact that scientists have not only been isolating the markers of neurologic activity in IBS but the markers of immunologic and alternative-pathway IRS activation in the small bowel of IBS victims the most recent 25 years or so, right up to recovering proof of, for example, specific lymphocytic activation in response to dietary components as well as local IgE in the small bowel specific to the dietary components that provoke the symptoms, lay people and practitioners alike continue to perpetuate the myth that this is illusory. Its kind of funny since the very chemicals which upregulate the ENS and CNS are released into the gut parenchyma and systemic circulatiion in these reactions...yet when they are isolated they are simply ignored as they do not fit "the model" perhaps someone invented elsewhere.Not an unusual practice when syndromes are studied from differeing perspectives that the owner of the one perspective should not acknowledge the validity of those whose work comes from an alternative perspective. Eventually the collective medical community gets past it and integrates all the knowledge. It is not there yet and that is reflected in what trickles down to and through non-healthcare professionals. ___________________________________"The gut normally has responses to what is put in it. In IBS, these responses appear to be abnormally exaggerated, leaving one to believe incorrectly that what is put in is the culprit rather its simply being the temperamental nature of the "IBS gut". " ____________________________________Sadly for the reader of this disinformation, the first statement is of course correct as it is the grosseest possible generality. The books I recommend would elucidate this process in detail.The second "action-response-conclusion" thinking indeed could be said of both investigatory ad diagnostic approaches....symptom based and causal alike. One observes a specific neurologic "event" and, not having quantified whether there is the prior presence of some chemical mediator (endogenous or exogenous) which would account for the neuolgic event, presumes and postulates the mechanism at work. Someone reads the posulate and infers fact. The inferred fact is implicated in reptition and thus becomes fact by acclimation. I see that in the IBS "research" done by many in the United States all the time, and then how it is explained here in foruims like this to patients hungry for information.In the case of food elements provoking the local inflammatory response in the small bowel at least the first step is accomplished that the scientists studying the allergologic and immunologic aspects of the syndrome have been espousing since it was first documented lo these many years. That is at least finally everyone acknowledges that (at keast in these 2 populations) some weird inflammatory reaction (which is not a measurable food "allergy" reaction by conventional means) does occur, and an array of inflammtory mediators are released in the small bowel which can upregualte sensory and motor function.Just 18 months ago most the majority of "IBS investigators" and GI docs in the USA were denouncing such mechanisms as non existent ("there is NO inflammtory response involved in IBS" was the dogma). That claim was posted loudly and often in IBS self help communities as well, including here, as recemtly as 6 months ago in spite of the fact it has been known to be incorrect for 20 years.Now, since it has also been well known physiologically since, say, 1979, that prostaglandins produced in proinflammatory reations in the gut and other forms of tissue and serotonin released in the same fashion upregulate bowel functiona and cause diarrhea....all of a sudden the persons who made these proclamation of folly have begun debating "ownership" of this weird IRS activation...CNS/Stress...ENS/Stress....Immunologic mechanisms. what an incredible laugh, and so typical of what I have had the dubious privilege of watching time and time again over the last 30 years.
To cut to the chase, It is just a stupid argument since it is self evident from an integrative view that the systems are fully interractive, codependent, and can be armed by specific mechanisms which can be sourced to each of the systems in question depending upon the patient and circumstance. AND it is obvious that there are subpopulatons where each is going to be found to be true vis a vis what is the primary arming mechanism after which the IRS can be provoked.Since, however, so far at LEAST IgE (mast cells, basophils) and T-lymphocyte arming mechanisms which are "immunologic" (and the circulating immuncoytes themselves ecrutied to the lamina propria) have been isolated along with the non-immunologic mechanisms, to suggest that the IRS activation by dietary components is not an etiologic mechanism of the proven loss of oral tolerance, rather it is somethng I have personally cooked up and deluded myself and others into beleiving (along with thousands of patients who have benefittted from this misbelief), well, said kindly this is simply an obsolete theory as it has been disproved. Get over it.When the scientists findings who have done this most recent work is added to the mix sometime in the coming year, along with a new medical text on Food Allergy and Intolerance written by experts in that field of medicine is published this year, these errors hopefully can be overcome and another step at integrating all the knowledge can be accomplished.Ohh yeah...I referenced the 1970's as a time of evolving understanding of proinflammatory mediators role in gut motility...a couple oldies from that time which illustrates what I mean by early steps towards understanding: ____________________"Lancet 1978 Apr 29;1(8070):906-8Prostaglandin-synthesis inhibitors in prophylaxis of food intolerance. Buisseret PD, Youlten LF, Heinzelmann DI, Lessof MH Prophylactic doses of aspirin, indomethacin, or ibuprofen prevented symptoms of food intolerance in five out of six patients who on several occasions had had acute gastrointestinal symptoms after the ingestion of specific foodstuffs. Blood and stool prostaglandin E2 and F2alpha concentrations during unprotected challenge were consistent with the idea that these symptoms were mediated through prostaglandin release. Prostaglandin-synthetase inhibitors may benefit some patients with specific food intolerance who are unable or unwilling to avoid the offending food. ___________________________: World J Surg 1979 Sep 20;3(5):565-78Prostaglandins and serotonin: nonpeptide diarrheogenic hormones.Jaffe BM.Prostaglandins and serotonin are vasoactive compounds with profound effects on the gastrointestinal tract. Both cause inhibition of gastric acid secretion (although serotonin stimulates gastric pepsin secretion), stimulation of intestinal motility, and conversion of small intestinal mucosa from absorption to secretion of water and electrolytes. Their effects on pancreatic and biliary function are still not clear. Although prostaglandins appear to elicit their effects primarily by a paracrine mode of action, and serotonin is primarily a neurotransmitter (neurocrine), it is clear that even under normal conditions both can function as humoral agents. For example, we have shown that serotonin plays a physiologic role as a humoral inhibitor of gastric acid secretion. However, the effects of these agents become more pronounced in patients with humorally mediated diarrheogenic syndromes. Serotonin (and related indoles, particularly 5-hydroxytryptophan) has been firmly implicated as a cause of diarrhea in patients with carcinoid syndrome; our recent studies suggest that the diagnosis can be more effectively made by measuring circulating immunoreactive serotonin concentrations than urinary excretion of 5-HIAA; that some circulating serotonin escapes hepatic inactivation and, thus, large intestinal tumors can cause carcinoid syndrome in the absence of hepatic metastases; and that large amounts of serotonin are produced by some noncarcinoid diarrheogenic tumors, including medullary carcinomas of the thyroid and tumors associated with the WDHA syndrome. A large number of tumors of probable neural crest origin, including medullary thyroid carcinoma, carcinoids, and tumors associated with the WDHA syndrome, secrete large amounts of prostaglandins, particularly PGE2. The clinical response of at least some of the patients harboring these tumors to inhibitors of prostaglandin synthesis (particularly indomethacin) suggests that prostaglandins play a role in the etiology of these diarrheogenic syndromes.Publication Types: � Review _______________________________________Adv Prostaglandin Thromboxane Res 1980;8:1627-31 An approach to evaluation of local intestinal PG production and clinical assessment of its inhibition by indomethacin in chronic diarrhea. Bukhave K, Rask-Madsen J No abstract ON LINE..Summary of Findings:The connection between gut motility and prostaglandin release was studied. PGE2 levels in the jejunal secretions IBS patients were elevated in 10 of 17 (59%) with cyclic IBS (D & C) and in "gluten enteropathy". Six IBS patients treated with indomethacin (INDOCIN: non-steroidal analgesic anti-inflammatory which works by inhibiting prostaglandins, which are inflammatory and pain mediators of various types) had a 50% reduction in stool volume and frequency. And withdrawal of the indocin caused the symptoms to return.Due to the absence of indicators of Type I inflammatory-allergic response, the authors state the findings suggested localized or gut-wall reactions . ___________________________Later they went on to study cromolyn sodium instead as an imunomdulator and got results in up to 95% of the subjects stduied depending upon dose and selection criterion.Anyway, just a couple of early examples of specific mediator assay and relationships in non-alergenic gut reactivity and symptom provocation. there's about 100 pages more abstracts on the subject since.The gut does not have a temperemental "nature" in IBS. The upregulation of the local and central structures, muscular and neurologic, along the "brain-gut axis" have biochemical basis, the total of which is yet to be fully elucidated, but it can be seen thus far that, like many other syndromes, it is not going to turn out to be some idiopathic mystery as was once believed not so long ago.Eat well. Think well. Be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Note...before comment one may wish to take quick look at this thread as well, as anexample of the basis from which I speak: http://www.ibsgroup.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php...ic&f=1&t=025795 Comment: ____________________________________"Look at the dates of these studies. Also some weren't controlled and in others a lot of information is missing. If these patients were diagnosed with IBS is wasn't under the Rome criteria as they did not have that then and used a different criteria. " _____________________________________Lord is it futile to explain in detail "here is an example of HOW FAR BACK the work goes...EARLY findings" etc. ...THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO be OLD! that was the point Oy! dude!I have hundreds of abstracts running from the 1970s to 2001...and have cherry-picked about 40 pages of them if anyone wants them but you cannot POSt 40 pages of abstracts or whole books.So the people that WANTED to learn and read them and assimilate them ASKED for them by email and received them, and those who did show interest or request them of course did not receive them. Rhetoric again. _______________________________________"Also on any food studies I would like to see a follow up after a couple years. That would be interesting to me" ________________________________________If you were up on all the material you would already know about it an your interest would have been satisfied. Broaden your study and reading material and you will see.This cracks me up too,again, as one commences to railing against old abtsrtacts and then posts old ones himself. LOL Enough rhetoric already.One needs to comprehend the full implication of each of the elements in the "model" (Figure 1) in the article I referenced. It appears one dioes not, otherwise one would see that the perpetuation of what one says I write (which I do not) and what one says I ignore (which I do not) is merely rhetoric again. If the practitioners I work with, the researchers who study the phenomena referenced, and myself did not comprehend the role of the CNS and ENS and IRS in the activation and regulation of the IRS and its relationship to symptom provocation in IBS then I could not possibley state over and over unequivicolly that the Diagram (with the addition of role of circualting immunocyte reactivity) was representative of the integration of each aspect of current understanding of IBS.I can only repeat myself so many times. Scotomas often are not self-resolving, which is clearly the case.So lets see if there is a question posted by anyone to which one can respond and be read accurately.Yes here is one: _____________________________________"If IBS is the result of food allergies (of course excluding exceptions to every rule), then, how come clinical hypnotherapy has such a high success rate WITHOUT modification or change or elimination of foods in the diet; and in most cases, how can once offending foods be reintroduced after successful completion of the hypnotherapy sessions, if IBS is secondary to food allergies, etc.???? How come??? " ________________________________________Actually this is several questions. And I will try try try keep it SIMPLE and by doing so I suspect someone will come back and suggest I left ou A and B and C. If so I will anser that too at that time. SIMPLE and SHORT are not synonymous. In fact they are ofetn mutually exclusive. This is one such instance. Sorry. First we have to keep in mind that IBS is not said by anyone especially me to be CAUSED by FOOD ALLERGY.Food ALLERGY is a reaction of the immune system (primarily the "fixed" cells found in the mucosa and skin) called mast cells which is virtully immediate onset, not dose dependent, and a specific antigen-antibody reaction mediates it. That is the person has become sensitized to a food the same way they became sensitiized to, say, an inhalant. The body formed a specific immunoglobulin to the food. The body should not do this, only to pathogens or parasites. It is a case of mistaken identity. It is a specific malfunction as the immune system has mechanisms which begin in the small bowel to identify safe stuff like foods from pathogens. In the case of allergy this mistaken formation of an immunoglobulin occurs. These circulate around. When the person ingests the food, this triggeres a specific type of immunologic response which is supposed to be protective. Mediators are released from the mast cells (and basophils if they have any around), which set of a chain of events which results in the immediate onset of sympotms of food allergy up to and including shock. Then there is a late-phase reaction hours later.In the general population this ocurs about 2%-5% frequency....depends whose estimate you use. Actual food ALLERGY by the classic definition of allergists occurs with a higher frequency it appears among IBS victims. One investigation suggests about 8%. This does not cause IBS it causes food allergy as a COMORBIDITY seen in IBS. So it has been thought, but recent events now call old definitions to question as you will see.Most dietary evaluation methods used in evaluating the effect of food on IBS symptoms are structured such that they only find reactions which are sudden onset and not dose related. This means they find any food allergy if it exists (something easy to do with dietary monitoring or one of the common blood tests like RAST or ELISA) AND it can find pseudoallergy (FALSE allergy which is cuased by a direct chemical reaction with specific structures found in some foods...like lectins for example) or direct toxic reactions from certain chemicals in foods, natural and added (peptides or histamine for example).If you take those several sudden-onset and non-dose dependent food provoking mechanisms you will find comorbid food allergy and false-allergy and no more. This is the least important type of interraction in IBS between what you put into the intestine and the provocation of symptoms. And it is the easiest to isolate, treat by avoidance or immunomodulation, AND the most difficult to attenuate with HT since it is a very powerful form of immune response which even the mechanisms built into the CNS designed to attenuate immunologic reactions would have difficulty attenuating....as it intrinsically does not WANT to block this particualr mechansism (actually there are several but I have only shown one) BECAUSE this is essential to protecting the body from infection.In fact some of the mediators released are designed to decrease the permeability of the blood-brain barrier to permit the movement of mediators into the cereborspinal fluid which will accentuate the CNS response in these reactions...to amplify the responses.One can to a degree alter perspective to the chronic suffering from ALLERGY via CBT, and one can alter, and increase, the attenuating responses...or reduce the reflex rsponses of anxiety and stress-related repsonses which further amplify an allergic reaction, but the degree to which this works in actaul ALLERGY is limited since you must overcome massive angtigen-antibody interraction.Now, so far the only subpopulations of IBS which have been studied enough vis a vis reactivity to food and additives to make defibitive statements as to the OTHER mechanisms involved are the 1/3 that are D-types and the 1/3 that ar cyclic d&c. C-types can and do show both comorbid allergy and comorbid intolerance but other mechanisms at work in these victims which overly attenuate lower bowel motility are of greater significance, since if there is exposure these patients do not respond with the classic "evacuation" chain of events. So whenever I talk, or quote, or describe, you may have noticed I alwsy speak in the contet of the 70% or so who are NOT C-types. There are distinctly differing mechanisms much less well understood by anyone so far.Now if you have a copy of the diagram (Figure 1 in this article in front of you printed out it will be easier to exxplain...without it most people who have not read alot on the usbject cannot follow along...)http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/userag ent?func=synergy&synergyAction=showFullText&doi=10.1046/j.1365-2036.2001.00951.x[/URL]Now to fionish the diagram draw a line between the "IgG" box and the OTHER NON IGE Mediated" box. The draw a line down from there directly to RELEASE OF MEDIATORS without going THROUGH the MAST CELL BOX.Now you have all the known mechanisms represented.The IgE box represents the food ALLERGY part, and the other (2) represent the myriad different types of direct immunologic and non-immunologic reactions that are triggered all by themseleves without any help from the ENS or the CNS in response to something in a food, or a food additive. There are, say, 7-8 other mechanisms.For example, see where it shows MUCOSAL ANTIGEN PROCESSING...this is the reactions that occur by lymphocytes in the wall of the small bowel. They criculate in and out of the lymphatics and blood stream so as to be always available locally in the gut wall in case of invasion.For years such researchers as Bengtsson and others in Sweden have been able to show that both the mast cells in the small bowel AND circulating immunocytes, such as the lymphocytes, react in IBS patients to certain foods and release the mediators which produce the d-type cascade of symptom onset.They take a bunch of patients who meet the ROME criteria for IBS and then remove all those who have comorbid food ALLERGY as confirmed by various conventional means of isolating circulating antibodies to foods. Get rid of the comorbid ALLERGY people so there is no confusion. They check for food provocation with double blind oral challenge to see which foods provoke symptoms.Since we are not talking ALLERGIES now we are tlaking about OTHER MECHANISMS (see diagram). What sets these apart from allergy cliniclly is that the reaction is DOSE DEPENDENT (it may take a goodly portion of the food to cause a response or a combination of two provoking foods together or consumptions over several meals to accumulate the dose which brings on symptoms) AND the onset of symptoms is DELAYED....from a few hours up to as much as 72 hours. So the oral challenge process is very time consuming if you try to find all the foods. So they chosoe a few of the most common that the persons are eating and just check those.Once they isolate which foods provoke symptoms for each patient they take them off those foods for a few days to make sure any provocation is removed.Then they take those people in slide a tube down their esophagus, stomach and isolate a section of the small bowel with a tube which 2 inflatable cuffs. Yout then have isolated section of small bowel so you can do a true blind challenge and you can capture evidence of what occurs in a true lind challenge (the patient has no way of knowing if anything, much less what, is instilled into the tube at any time...could be saline or could be a slurry containing the food challenge.Now to cut to the chase you always find the mediators in the washings which show that the gut immunocytes are either degranulating (mast cells) or circulating immunocytes are apoptosizing (losing cell wall integrity) and releasing their dozens of different and very powerful mediators into the small bowel mucosa and wall where the blood vessels, nerves, smooth muscle are that they are known to act directly upon.While all this has been going on the past few years, confirming not only what others have shown indirectly over the years with oral challenges to IBS patients and elimination diets and mast cell stabilizers, another investigator got the bright idea (Tornbloom) to talk a few IBS patients into letting him take full thickness biopsies of the small intestine to see if there are signs of inflammatory staging and/or long term reaction within the tissue.So he stuck in his thumb and pulled out the accumulations of t-cells that the other guys were finding their mediators in the washings provoked by specific foods. Which of course when you stopped instilling them the mediators went away because the reactions stopped and so did the symptoms. All the while this has been going on others have been studying the blood reactions of white cells in vitro and finding that the circulating cell reactions can be duplicatd OUTSIDE the body out of reach of the ENS and the CNS. This was first discovered, crudely, back in 1956.Anyway, the most recent step which confirms the accuracy of that diagram is that specific markers of immunoligic activation of t-cells (certain lymphocytes)in the small bwel wall were found when Bengtsson not only stsudied the washing BUT hje klast year started taking biopsies in these patients (ROME Criteria, non allergic, food provoked symptoms) and found, well, here is a direct quote on the findings from September 2001, which are being readied for publication sometime this year...."....we can show an allergy-like inflammation during challenges with parameters like Il-4, IFN-gamma, CD3, CD4, CD8 and IgE."If one understands a little about allergology and immunology one understands the significance of these markers. Simply put....the mediators noted IL-4 and IFN are T-cell mediators..,lymphocytes are breaking down in the small bowel of the subjects and releasing their intracellular inflammtory mediators and different types of foods provoked it. CD[3] [4] [8] are hard to explain simply...these are like receivers of information that differntiate different kinds of lymphocytes which perform different roles in inflammatory reactions...they interract with another substance called Major Histocompatability Complexes (I & II) which are supposed to make sure the right antigen (provoking agent of an immune response) gets presented to the right kind of t-cell for the right reaction. While Tornbloom showed the lymphocytes accumulating in the bowel walls of the IBS patients, Bengstsson found that there are several different classes involved in the inflammatory reaction by finding multiple class markers.Further, the really surprising thing is the presence of local IgE...remember the patients with CIRCULATING IgE indicating allergy were ELIMINATED. So this, and some earleir findings of IgE in the small bowel of food reactive but no allergenic subjects, shows one thing...an allergy-like mechanism (think IgE-mast cells) IS involved in even those where the classic allergy markers disaqualify them from beigna llegedly allergic, and IgE and the other mechanisms all occur absent input from the ENS or CNS...this is not reqired nr even a part of this type of reactivity...except after the reaction has begun and the ENS and CNS are provoked by the mediators.The cart, in this case, comes before the horse.Now from the diagram and from other study you know that the CNS and ENS are fully integrated with the imune system, and certain stressors on the CNS, or even certain kinds of other stimuli direct to certain aprts of the brain, can and do result in efferent (down-travelling) signals which can activate the fixed immune cells (mast cells) ABSENT any immediate immunolgic provocation. You can see that it can happen the opposite as well. BOTH can and do occur, so the question becomes in a given subject what is the combination? THIS is why the info has to be integrated so that future studies preferably would take into account the direct-immunilogic ally mediated reactions to diet provocation that occur in these patients. SO FAR that is not being done.So understanding this diagram and this grossly simplified example/explanation answers the question.CBT, for example, Grossly Simplified, is very effective in some and ineffective in others depending upon which portion of the "system" predominates as a source of symptoms.This therapy alters reaction to symptoms, perception of the consequences, and reaction to those consequeces etc....pure behavioral modification which first helps the victim gain better control over her responses to symptom onset and respond with less symptom-amplifying stress to the situations created by the syndrome. Therefore CBT alone will reduce the patients symptoms, even in the face of ongoing provocation, proportionate to the degree to which the patients RESPONSE TO the initial symptom has AMPLIFIED the symptoms....in some people this is SIGNIFICANT since their underlying symptoms may have been initially relatively mild but over time the way they react to the symptoms, and what they did to the persons life, and how the person adjusted or maladjusted, as you can see from the diagram showing the interraction of STRESS with the CNS and then in both directions the IRS and the ENS, may have ben significant.The same goes for HT, though at a more fundamental level. In simple terms, as you can see, the CNS can provoke the IRS to activate as can Immunologic (allergic) mechanisms as well as OTHER (non IgE mechanisms). Each can happen, and does absolutely, independently.Once can attenuate the IRS response, first by attenuating both the persons emotional reaction to a develping symtom, pain or cramping or chills, etc, AND especially in the case of NON IGE or IGG subclass meduated reactions, one can attenuate the reaction itslef. Not just after the fact BUT one can raise the threshold of reactivity. One may even bea ble to modulate the, for example, messengers like MHC within the IRS via certain specific cells located in the brain which perform that function. This is also an intriguing line of investigation.Anyway, In some cases where a pateint has no comorbid food allergy, and the provoking dose of a given food via one of the non allergic mechanisms is fairly high, the threshold of response can be raised through HT sufficiently that the reaction is attenuated enough that it eventually becomes subclinical (so weak as to not be noticed). This is one mechanism. Another is by altering perception of the symptom, and reducing the stresas and anxiety responses to symptoms and to the psychosocial consequences one interrupts the REFLEX LOOP you can see exists after provocation.Now if it were only certain cells or mechanisms involved, (for example only the "mucosal" immune system) it would theoretically be possible to produce extreme attenuation of the IRS response to non-pathogens. In a patient where this is the case it could occur.The trouble is, since there are mechanisms involved which are not "hard wired" to the CNS, the degree of success varies widely. In general, 80+% of patients will experience at least a moderate degree of symptom reduction. Do not forget that no studies measure successful outcome as 100% remission or nothing. Each has a different threshold of their definition of success which has to be taken into account, along with the selection process.Anyway, to repeat, one can not only break the reflex arc to locally provoked IRS responses which are independent of the CNS and ENS, but one can reduce or eliminate the CNS-locus of IRS activation, which varies in contribution to symptoms from person to person, AND one can raise the threshold of non IgE mediated reactions to some degree as well. Like KM is fond of saying "Your mileage may vary".Hence some people will actually regain some oral tolerance...in some cases total tolerance to some foods...as a result of HT. This is not a mystery to anyone including the immunologists who study the "middle 3 boxes" in this diagram...and the missing line we drew in to rpesent the cellular responses. hell, as simply stated, you can regain all oral tolerance if you simply either stabilize the cell walls of the immunocytes against all stimuli via immunomodulation, or eliminate all sources of provocation from each source.Conversely, the reason that studies on DIETARY manipulation alone prodcue similar results consitently over the years to any other single mode therapy is just that...70, 80, 90% experiencing a reduction in symptoms from modest to extreme in like fashion to HT is again because the response is going to be proportionate to the degree of comorbid allergy removed, and the degree of contribution of IRS activation by mechanisms other than IgE/IgG in eliciting a small bowel centered inflammatory response.This is why many patients who undergo dietary therapy alone, but who do have measurable signs of exaggerated stress and anxiety, simply "lose" that behavior after the provoking fods are removed even though CBT or HT was not used along with dietary therapy.The direct chemical effects of mediators upon the CNS and ENS are removed and this reduces the activation of those parts of the brain-gut axis which respond directly to certain mediators among the over 100 that may be involved.Also, when you remove the fear of loss of bowel control, pain, bloating chills dizziness etc. the causal basis of ther anxiety in some folks is removed and they respond accordingly (they may have no great degree of patterned-in learned response to stress).So hopefully you can see why any single-mode therapy for IBS will be very successful for some, moderately for others, and not at all for others...hence the cinsistency in the outcomes between the single modalities. Like a car with plugged injectors and a bad chip in the EEC, if you fix one you will get response to the degree that one contributes to the malfunction...in the case of the injectors the EEC has the capacity to make adjustments to partially compensate and reduce the symptoms.THAT IS WHY THE MODALITIES HAVE TO BE COMBINED in an integrated fashion to get the BEST outcomes. This is my mantra, nothing more or less, and so it shall remain regardless of assertions to the contrary.
If everyone could put aside their predjudices and agendas, and instead opened themselves up to the clinical experience and finidings of others working from a diffenret anghle and openly integrated the best of both. ALL IBS patients would enjoy an opportunity to achieve the highest chance at the greatest degree of remission possible for themselves. This would require the renunciation of human behavior, however...an unlikely event.Until we do that, there will always be a degree of compromise in the outcomes, and varying degrees of success, with any modality or treatment program.If that whole thing still cannot be comprehended as to what the message is, I must say I know of know simpler way of answering the question(s) and still include enough information to be meaningful and accurate. A few other articles which explore the areas discussed here, in the Diagram I referred you to and that article, and many others beyond these few more...one must seek a very broad specturm of study to visualize the exquisite integration of the CNS, ENS, and INS...then to understand their various roles in conditions like IBS.....just a very few examples of what I mean... ___________________________________Nord Med 1996 Apr;111(4):109-12, 118 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut [Sick of food? Knowledge and hypothesis on food intolerance][Article in Norwegian]Jacobsen MB, Vatn MH.Medisinsk avd A, Rikshospitalet, Oslo.Food intolerance is frequently reported by patients and represent a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. We review the nomenclature and report on symptoms, diagnostic tests and treatment. The nomenclature presented is based on the primary events such as toxic reactions, allergy or an undefined mechanism, including psychosomatic, although these subgroups may involve common pathogenetic mechanism. Double blind placebo controlled food challenge is the golden standard in the diagnostic workup and the importance of elimination diets--individually tailored to each patients requirements in cooperation with a nutritionist--is stressed. Through strict adherence to diagnostic and therapeutical guidelines, therapy may resolve food induced symptoms. Based on preliminary findings of signal transduction, we propose that symptoms in some patients may depend on an allergy type IV reaction. (** a 1-3 day delayed-onset reaction involving macrophages and effector T-cells)This working hypothesis forms the basis for further accumulation of knowledge of food intolerance reactions.Publication Types: � Review � Review, Tutorial ____________________________: Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 1999 Oct;13(3):429-36 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Putative inflammatory and immunological mechanisms in functional bowel disorders.Collins SM, Vallance B, Barbara G, Borgaonkar MIntestinal Diseases Research Unit, McMaster University Medical Center, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.The observations that irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) may be precipitated by an acute enteric infection, or occurs commonly in patients in remission from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has prompted consideration of inflammation as a putative basis for symptom generation in IBS. In this regard, IBS may follow a pattern of pathogenesis that is similar to asthma--which was once considered a psychosomatic disease. This review examines the basic scientific evidence of a functional interface between the immune and sensory-motor systems of the gut and discusses how this may be relevant to a subgroup of IBS patients. In addition, review will examine the implications of this for the diagnosis and treatment of IBS.Publication Types: � Review � Review, tutorial __________________________________Page 1051 of the hard copy of the 2000 Merck manual: "RECENTLY FOOD INTOLERANCE WAS FOUND TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SYMPTOMS OF SOME PATIENTS WITH THE IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME, CONFIRMED BY DOUBLE-BLIND FOOD CHALLENGE. AN INCREASE IN RECTAL PROSTAGLANDIN LEVELS WAS NOTED WHEN A REACTION OCCURRED. PRELIMINARY INFORMATION SUGGESTS THE SAME PHENOMENON MAY TAKE PLACE IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC ULCERATIVE COLITIS." ____________________________________: Lancet 2000 Jul 29;356(9227):400-1 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Relation between food provocation and systemic immune activation in patients with food intolerance.Jacobsen MB, Aukrust P, Kittang E, Muller F, Ueland T, Bratlie J, Bjerkeli V, Vatn MH.We found that food provocation in food intolerant patients was characterised by a general and systemic immune activation accompanied by an increase in systemic symptoms. Our findings might be important for the understanding of the mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of food intolerance. ____________________________________HISTOPATHOLOGICAL FINDINGS IN JEJUNUM OF PATIENTS WITH SEVERE IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROMETornbloom H, Lindberg, G, Nyberg B, Veress BUniversity if Lund, Malmo, SwedenDIGESTIVE DISEASE WEEK, MAY 21-24, 2000, SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA(6) patients with documented severe IBS which met all ROME criteria and normal antroduodenal manometry (thus not misdiagnosed cases of idiopathic intestinal pseudo-obstruction) where laparoscopized to the level of the jejunum. In all (6) when jejunal biopsies were obtained inflammatory infiltration of lymphocytes was found in the myenteric plexus (the network of nerve fibers and neuroganglie found between the longitudinal and circular layers of smooth muscle of the intestine). The lymphocytes were situated in periganglionic and intraganglionic locations. (4) patients showed hypertrophy of the longitudinal muscle layer, and (5) patients showed abnormailities of the interstitial Cells of Cajal **[**Synapse like contacts between ICC and nerve endings are characteristic, ICC make contact with smooth muscle cells by means of close appositions or gap junctions. ICC are crucial in generation of slow waves and in neural transmission in the gut.] ____________________________Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2001 Mar;280(3):G315-8 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Stress and the Gastrointestinal Tract IV. Modulation of intestinal inflammation by stress: basic mechanisms and clinical relevance.Collins SM.McMaster University Medical Centre, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada. scollins###fhs.mcmaster.caThe stress response in a healthy organism is generally viewed as a warning and thus a protective reaction to a threat. However, the response may be deleterious if it is linked to an inflammatory stimulus or if it proceeds an inflammatory event. Prior stress enhances the response to an inflammatory stimulus by a mechanism that is independent of the release of hypothalamic corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) or arginine vasopressin. Putative mechanisms include an increase in intestinal permeability as well as the release of the proinflammatory neuropeptide substance P. Stress may also reactivate previous inflammation when applied in conjunction with a small luminal stimulus. This reactivation involves increased permeability and requires the presence of T lymphocytes.Inflammatory mediators activate hypothalamic pathways, and a negative feedback loop, mediated by CRF release, has been proposed because animals with impaired hypothalamic CRF responses are more susceptible to inflammatory stimuli. Together, these experimental observations provide insights into the expression of inflammatory disorders in humans, including inflammatory bowel disease and postinfective irritable bowel syndrome.Publication Types: � Review � Review, Tutorial _____________________________: Glia 2001 Nov;36(2):180-90 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Immune function of astrocytes.Dong Y, Benveniste EN.Department of Cell Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0005, USA.Astrocytes are the major glial cell within the central nervous system (CNS) and have a number of important physiological properties related to CNS homeostasis. The aspect of astrocyte biology addressed in this review article is the astrocyte as an immunocompetent cell within the brain. The capacity of astrocytes to express class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) antigens and costimulatory molecules (B7 and CD40) that are critical for antigen presentation and T-cell activation are discussed. The functional role of astrocytes as immune effector cells and how this may influence aspects of inflammation and immune reactivity within the brain follows, emphasizing the involvement of astrocytes in promoting Th2 responses. The ability of astrocytes to produce a wide array of chemokines and cytokines is discussed, with an emphasis on the immunological properties of these mediators. The significance of astrocytic antigen presentation and chemokine/cytokine production to neurological diseases with an immunological component is described. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Publication Types: � Review � Review, Academic ___________________________________Psychosom Med 2001 Nov-Dec;63(6):959-65 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Phobic anxiety changes the function of brain-gut axis in irritable bowel syndrome.Blomhoff S, Spetalen S, Jacobsen MB, Malt UF.Department of Psychosomatic and Behavioral Medicine, National Hospital, Oslo, Norway. svein.blomhoff###riskshospitalet.noOBJECTIVE: Disease severity in the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is highly influenced by psychiatric comorbidity. The mechanism of this influence is generally unknown, even if the brain-gut axis seems to be involved. Recent research has indicated that IBS patients have aberrant perception of visceral stimuli in the CNS. We compared IBS patients with and without comorbid phobic anxiety to see if the comorbid disorder influenced brain information processing of auditory stimuli, and looked for possible consequences with respect to visceral sensitivity thresholds and disease severity. METHODS: Eleven female patients with IBS with comorbid phobic anxiety disorder were compared with 22 age-matched female IBS patients without such comorbidity. The groups were compared with respect to event-related potentials (ERP), auditory-presented words with emotional contents, barostat-assessed visceral sensitivity thresholds, and symptom levels the last week before assessment. RESULTS: The comorbid group had a significantly enhanced first negative ERP wave (N1) to all stimuli, indicating increased use of brain attentional resources. It also had increased visceral threshold for the sensation of gas, and reduced gas-stool and gas-discomfort tolerances compared with the noncomorbid group. Enhanced N1 amplitude at the frontal electrode and reduced gas-stools tolerance significantly predicted subjective gas complaints, explaining 47% of the symptom variation. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests an association between information processing in the frontal brain and visceral sensitivity characteristics in IBS patients, and indicates that subjective disease-related symptomatology is predicted by brain perceptual characteristics. The findings indicate that an interaction between IBS-related and anxiety-related hyperreactivity in the frontal brain may constitute a psychophysiological mechanism for the contribution of psychiatric comorbidity to severity and duration of the irritable bowel syndrome.PMID: 11719635 [PubMed - in process] ____________________________________The beat goes on.....Eat well. Think well. Be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Note...before comment one may wish to take quick look at this thread as well, as anexample of the basis from which I speak: http://www.ibsgroup.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php...ic&f=1&t=025795 Comment: ____________________________________"Look at the dates of these studies. Also some weren't controlled and in others a lot of information is missing. If these patients were diagnosed with IBS is wasn't under the Rome criteria as they did not have that then and used a different criteria. " _____________________________________Lord is it futile to explain in detail "here is an example of HOW FAR BACK the work goes...EARLY findings" etc. ...THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO be OLD! that was the point Oy! dude!I have hundreds of abstracts running from the 1970s to 2001...and have cherry-picked about 40 pages of them if anyone wants them but you cannot POSt 40 pages of abstracts or whole books.So the people that WANTED to learn and read them and assimilate them ASKED for them by email and received them, and those who did show interest or request them of course did not receive them. Rhetoric again. _______________________________________"Also on any food studies I would like to see a follow up after a couple years. That would be interesting to me" ________________________________________If you were up on all the material you would already know about it an your interest would have been satisfied. Broaden your study and reading material and you will see.This cracks me up too,again, as one commences to railing against old abtsrtacts and then posts old ones himself. LOL Enough rhetoric already.One needs to comprehend the full implication of each of the elements in the "model" (Figure 1) in the article I referenced. It appears one dioes not, otherwise one would see that the perpetuation of what one says I write (which I do not) and what one says I ignore (which I do not) is merely rhetoric again. If the practitioners I work with, the researchers who study the phenomena referenced, and myself did not comprehend the role of the CNS and ENS and IRS in the activation and regulation of the IRS and its relationship to symptom provocation in IBS then I could not possibley state over and over unequivicolly that the Diagram (with the addition of role of circualting immunocyte reactivity) was representative of the integration of each aspect of current understanding of IBS.I can only repeat myself so many times. Scotomas often are not self-resolving, which is clearly the case.So lets see if there is a question posted by anyone to which one can respond and be read accurately.Yes here is one: _____________________________________"If IBS is the result of food allergies (of course excluding exceptions to every rule), then, how come clinical hypnotherapy has such a high success rate WITHOUT modification or change or elimination of foods in the diet; and in most cases, how can once offending foods be reintroduced after successful completion of the hypnotherapy sessions, if IBS is secondary to food allergies, etc.???? How come??? " ________________________________________Actually this is several questions. And I will try try try keep it SIMPLE and by doing so I suspect someone will come back and suggest I left ou A and B and C. If so I will anser that too at that time. SIMPLE and SHORT are not synonymous. In fact they are ofetn mutually exclusive. This is one such instance. Sorry. First we have to keep in mind that IBS is not said by anyone especially me to be CAUSED by FOOD ALLERGY.Food ALLERGY is a reaction of the immune system (primarily the "fixed" cells found in the mucosa and skin) called mast cells which is virtully immediate onset, not dose dependent, and a specific antigen-antibody reaction mediates it. That is the person has become sensitized to a food the same way they became sensitiized to, say, an inhalant. The body formed a specific immunoglobulin to the food. The body should not do this, only to pathogens or parasites. It is a case of mistaken identity. It is a specific malfunction as the immune system has mechanisms which begin in the small bowel to identify safe stuff like foods from pathogens. In the case of allergy this mistaken formation of an immunoglobulin occurs. These circulate around. When the person ingests the food, this triggeres a specific type of immunologic response which is supposed to be protective. Mediators are released from the mast cells (and basophils if they have any around), which set of a chain of events which results in the immediate onset of sympotms of food allergy up to and including shock. Then there is a late-phase reaction hours later.In the general population this ocurs about 2%-5% frequency....depends whose estimate you use. Actual food ALLERGY by the classic definition of allergists occurs with a higher frequency it appears among IBS victims. One investigation suggests about 8%. This does not cause IBS it causes food allergy as a COMORBIDITY seen in IBS. So it has been thought, but recent events now call old definitions to question as you will see.Most dietary evaluation methods used in evaluating the effect of food on IBS symptoms are structured such that they only find reactions which are sudden onset and not dose related. This means they find any food allergy if it exists (something easy to do with dietary monitoring or one of the common blood tests like RAST or ELISA) AND it can find pseudoallergy (FALSE allergy which is cuased by a direct chemical reaction with specific structures found in some foods...like lectins for example) or direct toxic reactions from certain chemicals in foods, natural and added (peptides or histamine for example).If you take those several sudden-onset and non-dose dependent food provoking mechanisms you will find comorbid food allergy and false-allergy and no more. This is the least important type of interraction in IBS between what you put into the intestine and the provocation of symptoms. And it is the easiest to isolate, treat by avoidance or immunomodulation, AND the most difficult to attenuate with HT since it is a very powerful form of immune response which even the mechanisms built into the CNS designed to attenuate immunologic reactions would have difficulty attenuating....as it intrinsically does not WANT to block this particualr mechansism (actually there are several but I have only shown one) BECAUSE this is essential to protecting the body from infection.In fact some of the mediators released are designed to decrease the permeability of the blood-brain barrier to permit the movement of mediators into the cereborspinal fluid which will accentuate the CNS response in these reactions...to amplify the responses.One can to a degree alter perspective to the chronic suffering from ALLERGY via CBT, and one can alter, and increase, the attenuating responses...or reduce the reflex rsponses of anxiety and stress-related repsonses which further amplify an allergic reaction, but the degree to which this works in actaul ALLERGY is limited since you must overcome massive angtigen-antibody interraction.Now, so far the only subpopulations of IBS which have been studied enough vis a vis reactivity to food and additives to make defibitive statements as to the OTHER mechanisms involved are the 1/3 that are D-types and the 1/3 that ar cyclic d&c. C-types can and do show both comorbid allergy and comorbid intolerance but other mechanisms at work in these victims which overly attenuate lower bowel motility are of greater significance, since if there is exposure these patients do not respond with the classic "evacuation" chain of events. So whenever I talk, or quote, or describe, you may have noticed I alwsy speak in the contet of the 70% or so who are NOT C-types. There are distinctly differing mechanisms much less well understood by anyone so far.Now if you have a copy of the diagram (Figure 1 in this article in front of you printed out it will be easier to exxplain...without it most people who have not read alot on the usbject cannot follow along...)http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/userag ent?func=synergy&synergyAction=showFullText&doi=10.1046/j.1365-2036.2001.00951.x[/URL]Now to fionish the diagram draw a line between the "IgG" box and the OTHER NON IGE Mediated" box. The draw a line down from there directly to RELEASE OF MEDIATORS without going THROUGH the MAST CELL BOX.Now you have all the known mechanisms represented.The IgE box represents the food ALLERGY part, and the other (2) represent the myriad different types of direct immunologic and non-immunologic reactions that are triggered all by themseleves without any help from the ENS or the CNS in response to something in a food, or a food additive. There are, say, 7-8 other mechanisms.For example, see where it shows MUCOSAL ANTIGEN PROCESSING...this is the reactions that occur by lymphocytes in the wall of the small bowel. They criculate in and out of the lymphatics and blood stream so as to be always available locally in the gut wall in case of invasion.For years such researchers as Bengtsson and others in Sweden have been able to show that both the mast cells in the small bowel AND circulating immunocytes, such as the lymphocytes, react in IBS patients to certain foods and release the mediators which produce the d-type cascade of symptom onset.They take a bunch of patients who meet the ROME criteria for IBS and then remove all those who have comorbid food ALLERGY as confirmed by various conventional means of isolating circulating antibodies to foods. Get rid of the comorbid ALLERGY people so there is no confusion. They check for food provocation with double blind oral challenge to see which foods provoke symptoms.Since we are not talking ALLERGIES now we are tlaking about OTHER MECHANISMS (see diagram). What sets these apart from allergy cliniclly is that the reaction is DOSE DEPENDENT (it may take a goodly portion of the food to cause a response or a combination of two provoking foods together or consumptions over several meals to accumulate the dose which brings on symptoms) AND the onset of symptoms is DELAYED....from a few hours up to as much as 72 hours. So the oral challenge process is very time consuming if you try to find all the foods. So they chosoe a few of the most common that the persons are eating and just check those.Once they isolate which foods provoke symptoms for each patient they take them off those foods for a few days to make sure any provocation is removed.Then they take those people in slide a tube down their esophagus, stomach and isolate a section of the small bowel with a tube which 2 inflatable cuffs. Yout then have isolated section of small bowel so you can do a true blind challenge and you can capture evidence of what occurs in a true lind challenge (the patient has no way of knowing if anything, much less what, is instilled into the tube at any time...could be saline or could be a slurry containing the food challenge.Now to cut to the chase you always find the mediators in the washings which show that the gut immunocytes are either degranulating (mast cells) or circulating immunocytes are apoptosizing (losing cell wall integrity) and releasing their dozens of different and very powerful mediators into the small bowel mucosa and wall where the blood vessels, nerves, smooth muscle are that they are known to act directly upon.While all this has been going on the past few years, confirming not only what others have shown indirectly over the years with oral challenges to IBS patients and elimination diets and mast cell stabilizers, another investigator got the bright idea (Tornbloom) to talk a few IBS patients into letting him take full thickness biopsies of the small intestine to see if there are signs of inflammatory staging and/or long term reaction within the tissue.So he stuck in his thumb and pulled out the accumulations of t-cells that the other guys were finding their mediators in the washings provoked by specific foods. Which of course when you stopped instilling them the mediators went away because the reactions stopped and so did the symptoms. All the while this has been going on others have been studying the blood reactions of white cells in vitro and finding that the circulating cell reactions can be duplicatd OUTSIDE the body out of reach of the ENS and the CNS. This was first discovered, crudely, back in 1956.Anyway, the most recent step which confirms the accuracy of that diagram is that specific markers of immunoligic activation of t-cells (certain lymphocytes)in the small bwel wall were found when Bengtsson not only stsudied the washing BUT hje klast year started taking biopsies in these patients (ROME Criteria, non allergic, food provoked symptoms) and found, well, here is a direct quote on the findings from September 2001, which are being readied for publication sometime this year...."....we can show an allergy-like inflammation during challenges with parameters like Il-4, IFN-gamma, CD3, CD4, CD8 and IgE."If one understands a little about allergology and immunology one understands the significance of these markers. Simply put....the mediators noted IL-4 and IFN are T-cell mediators..,lymphocytes are breaking down in the small bowel of the subjects and releasing their intracellular inflammtory mediators and different types of foods provoked it. CD[3] [4] [8] are hard to explain simply...these are like receivers of information that differntiate different kinds of lymphocytes which perform different roles in inflammatory reactions...they interract with another substance called Major Histocompatability Complexes (I & II) which are supposed to make sure the right antigen (provoking agent of an immune response) gets presented to the right kind of t-cell for the right reaction. While Tornbloom showed the lymphocytes accumulating in the bowel walls of the IBS patients, Bengstsson found that there are several different classes involved in the inflammatory reaction by finding multiple class markers.Further, the really surprising thing is the presence of local IgE...remember the patients with CIRCULATING IgE indicating allergy were ELIMINATED. So this, and some earleir findings of IgE in the small bowel of food reactive but no allergenic subjects, shows one thing...an allergy-like mechanism (think IgE-mast cells) IS involved in even those where the classic allergy markers disaqualify them from beigna llegedly allergic, and IgE and the other mechanisms all occur absent input from the ENS or CNS...this is not reqired nr even a part of this type of reactivity...except after the reaction has begun and the ENS and CNS are provoked by the mediators.The cart, in this case, comes before the horse.Now from the diagram and from other study you know that the CNS and ENS are fully integrated with the imune system, and certain stressors on the CNS, or even certain kinds of other stimuli direct to certain aprts of the brain, can and do result in efferent (down-travelling) signals which can activate the fixed immune cells (mast cells) ABSENT any immediate immunolgic provocation. You can see that it can happen the opposite as well. BOTH can and do occur, so the question becomes in a given subject what is the combination? THIS is why the info has to be integrated so that future studies preferably would take into account the direct-immunilogic ally mediated reactions to diet provocation that occur in these patients. SO FAR that is not being done.So understanding this diagram and this grossly simplified example/explanation answers the question.CBT, for example, Grossly Simplified, is very effective in some and ineffective in others depending upon which portion of the "system" predominates as a source of symptoms.This therapy alters reaction to symptoms, perception of the consequences, and reaction to those consequeces etc....pure behavioral modification which first helps the victim gain better control over her responses to symptom onset and respond with less symptom-amplifying stress to the situations created by the syndrome. Therefore CBT alone will reduce the patients symptoms, even in the face of ongoing provocation, proportionate to the degree to which the patients RESPONSE TO the initial symptom has AMPLIFIED the symptoms....in some people this is SIGNIFICANT since their underlying symptoms may have been initially relatively mild but over time the way they react to the symptoms, and what they did to the persons life, and how the person adjusted or maladjusted, as you can see from the diagram showing the interraction of STRESS with the CNS and then in both directions the IRS and the ENS, may have ben significant.The same goes for HT, though at a more fundamental level. In simple terms, as you can see, the CNS can provoke the IRS to activate as can Immunologic (allergic) mechanisms as well as OTHER (non IgE mechanisms). Each can happen, and does absolutely, independently.Once can attenuate the IRS response, first by attenuating both the persons emotional reaction to a develping symtom, pain or cramping or chills, etc, AND especially in the case of NON IGE or IGG subclass meduated reactions, one can attenuate the reaction itslef. Not just after the fact BUT one can raise the threshold of reactivity. One may even bea ble to modulate the, for example, messengers like MHC within the IRS via certain specific cells located in the brain which perform that function. This is also an intriguing line of investigation.Anyway, In some cases where a pateint has no comorbid food allergy, and the provoking dose of a given food via one of the non allergic mechanisms is fairly high, the threshold of response can be raised through HT sufficiently that the reaction is attenuated enough that it eventually becomes subclinical (so weak as to not be noticed). This is one mechanism. Another is by altering perception of the symptom, and reducing the stresas and anxiety responses to symptoms and to the psychosocial consequences one interrupts the REFLEX LOOP you can see exists after provocation.Now if it were only certain cells or mechanisms involved, (for example only the "mucosal" immune system) it would theoretically be possible to produce extreme attenuation of the IRS response to non-pathogens. In a patient where this is the case it could occur.The trouble is, since there are mechanisms involved which are not "hard wired" to the CNS, the degree of success varies widely. In general, 80+% of patients will experience at least a moderate degree of symptom reduction. Do not forget that no studies measure successful outcome as 100% remission or nothing. Each has a different threshold of their definition of success which has to be taken into account, along with the selection process.Anyway, to repeat, one can not only break the reflex arc to locally provoked IRS responses which are independent of the CNS and ENS, but one can reduce or eliminate the CNS-locus of IRS activation, which varies in contribution to symptoms from person to person, AND one can raise the threshold of non IgE mediated reactions to some degree as well. Like KM is fond of saying "Your mileage may vary".Hence some people will actually regain some oral tolerance...in some cases total tolerance to some foods...as a result of HT. This is not a mystery to anyone including the immunologists who study the "middle 3 boxes" in this diagram...and the missing line we drew in to rpesent the cellular responses. hell, as simply stated, you can regain all oral tolerance if you simply either stabilize the cell walls of the immunocytes against all stimuli via immunomodulation, or eliminate all sources of provocation from each source.Conversely, the reason that studies on DIETARY manipulation alone prodcue similar results consitently over the years to any other single mode therapy is just that...70, 80, 90% experiencing a reduction in symptoms from modest to extreme in like fashion to HT is again because the response is going to be proportionate to the degree of comorbid allergy removed, and the degree of contribution of IRS activation by mechanisms other than IgE/IgG in eliciting a small bowel centered inflammatory response.This is why many patients who undergo dietary therapy alone, but who do have measurable signs of exaggerated stress and anxiety, simply "lose" that behavior after the provoking fods are removed even though CBT or HT was not used along with dietary therapy.The direct chemical effects of mediators upon the CNS and ENS are removed and this reduces the activation of those parts of the brain-gut axis which respond directly to certain mediators among the over 100 that may be involved.Also, when you remove the fear of loss of bowel control, pain, bloating chills dizziness etc. the causal basis of ther anxiety in some folks is removed and they respond accordingly (they may have no great degree of patterned-in learned response to stress).So hopefully you can see why any single-mode therapy for IBS will be very successful for some, moderately for others, and not at all for others...hence the cinsistency in the outcomes between the single modalities. Like a car with plugged injectors and a bad chip in the EEC, if you fix one you will get response to the degree that one contributes to the malfunction...in the case of the injectors the EEC has the capacity to make adjustments to partially compensate and reduce the symptoms.THAT IS WHY THE MODALITIES HAVE TO BE COMBINED in an integrated fashion to get the BEST outcomes. This is my mantra, nothing more or less, and so it shall remain regardless of assertions to the contrary.
If everyone could put aside their predjudices and agendas, and instead opened themselves up to the clinical experience and finidings of others working from a diffenret anghle and openly integrated the best of both. ALL IBS patients would enjoy an opportunity to achieve the highest chance at the greatest degree of remission possible for themselves. This would require the renunciation of human behavior, however...an unlikely event.Until we do that, there will always be a degree of compromise in the outcomes, and varying degrees of success, with any modality or treatment program.If that whole thing still cannot be comprehended as to what the message is, I must say I know of know simpler way of answering the question(s) and still include enough information to be meaningful and accurate. A few other articles which explore the areas discussed here, in the Diagram I referred you to and that article, and many others beyond these few more...one must seek a very broad specturm of study to visualize the exquisite integration of the CNS, ENS, and INS...then to understand their various roles in conditions like IBS.....just a very few examples of what I mean... ___________________________________Nord Med 1996 Apr;111(4):109-12, 118 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut [Sick of food? Knowledge and hypothesis on food intolerance][Article in Norwegian]Jacobsen MB, Vatn MH.Medisinsk avd A, Rikshospitalet, Oslo.Food intolerance is frequently reported by patients and represent a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. We review the nomenclature and report on symptoms, diagnostic tests and treatment. The nomenclature presented is based on the primary events such as toxic reactions, allergy or an undefined mechanism, including psychosomatic, although these subgroups may involve common pathogenetic mechanism. Double blind placebo controlled food challenge is the golden standard in the diagnostic workup and the importance of elimination diets--individually tailored to each patients requirements in cooperation with a nutritionist--is stressed. Through strict adherence to diagnostic and therapeutical guidelines, therapy may resolve food induced symptoms. Based on preliminary findings of signal transduction, we propose that symptoms in some patients may depend on an allergy type IV reaction. (** a 1-3 day delayed-onset reaction involving macrophages and effector T-cells)This working hypothesis forms the basis for further accumulation of knowledge of food intolerance reactions.Publication Types: � Review � Review, Tutorial ____________________________: Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 1999 Oct;13(3):429-36 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Putative inflammatory and immunological mechanisms in functional bowel disorders.Collins SM, Vallance B, Barbara G, Borgaonkar MIntestinal Diseases Research Unit, McMaster University Medical Center, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.The observations that irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) may be precipitated by an acute enteric infection, or occurs commonly in patients in remission from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has prompted consideration of inflammation as a putative basis for symptom generation in IBS. In this regard, IBS may follow a pattern of pathogenesis that is similar to asthma--which was once considered a psychosomatic disease. This review examines the basic scientific evidence of a functional interface between the immune and sensory-motor systems of the gut and discusses how this may be relevant to a subgroup of IBS patients. In addition, review will examine the implications of this for the diagnosis and treatment of IBS.Publication Types: � Review � Review, tutorial __________________________________Page 1051 of the hard copy of the 2000 Merck manual: "RECENTLY FOOD INTOLERANCE WAS FOUND TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SYMPTOMS OF SOME PATIENTS WITH THE IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME, CONFIRMED BY DOUBLE-BLIND FOOD CHALLENGE. AN INCREASE IN RECTAL PROSTAGLANDIN LEVELS WAS NOTED WHEN A REACTION OCCURRED. PRELIMINARY INFORMATION SUGGESTS THE SAME PHENOMENON MAY TAKE PLACE IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC ULCERATIVE COLITIS." ____________________________________: Lancet 2000 Jul 29;356(9227):400-1 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Relation between food provocation and systemic immune activation in patients with food intolerance.Jacobsen MB, Aukrust P, Kittang E, Muller F, Ueland T, Bratlie J, Bjerkeli V, Vatn MH.We found that food provocation in food intolerant patients was characterised by a general and systemic immune activation accompanied by an increase in systemic symptoms. Our findings might be important for the understanding of the mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of food intolerance. ____________________________________HISTOPATHOLOGICAL FINDINGS IN JEJUNUM OF PATIENTS WITH SEVERE IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROMETornbloom H, Lindberg, G, Nyberg B, Veress BUniversity if Lund, Malmo, SwedenDIGESTIVE DISEASE WEEK, MAY 21-24, 2000, SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA(6) patients with documented severe IBS which met all ROME criteria and normal antroduodenal manometry (thus not misdiagnosed cases of idiopathic intestinal pseudo-obstruction) where laparoscopized to the level of the jejunum. In all (6) when jejunal biopsies were obtained inflammatory infiltration of lymphocytes was found in the myenteric plexus (the network of nerve fibers and neuroganglie found between the longitudinal and circular layers of smooth muscle of the intestine). The lymphocytes were situated in periganglionic and intraganglionic locations. (4) patients showed hypertrophy of the longitudinal muscle layer, and (5) patients showed abnormailities of the interstitial Cells of Cajal **[**Synapse like contacts between ICC and nerve endings are characteristic, ICC make contact with smooth muscle cells by means of close appositions or gap junctions. ICC are crucial in generation of slow waves and in neural transmission in the gut.] ____________________________Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2001 Mar;280(3):G315-8 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Stress and the Gastrointestinal Tract IV. Modulation of intestinal inflammation by stress: basic mechanisms and clinical relevance.Collins SM.McMaster University Medical Centre, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada. scollins###fhs.mcmaster.caThe stress response in a healthy organism is generally viewed as a warning and thus a protective reaction to a threat. However, the response may be deleterious if it is linked to an inflammatory stimulus or if it proceeds an inflammatory event. Prior stress enhances the response to an inflammatory stimulus by a mechanism that is independent of the release of hypothalamic corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) or arginine vasopressin. Putative mechanisms include an increase in intestinal permeability as well as the release of the proinflammatory neuropeptide substance P. Stress may also reactivate previous inflammation when applied in conjunction with a small luminal stimulus. This reactivation involves increased permeability and requires the presence of T lymphocytes.Inflammatory mediators activate hypothalamic pathways, and a negative feedback loop, mediated by CRF release, has been proposed because animals with impaired hypothalamic CRF responses are more susceptible to inflammatory stimuli. Together, these experimental observations provide insights into the expression of inflammatory disorders in humans, including inflammatory bowel disease and postinfective irritable bowel syndrome.Publication Types: � Review � Review, Tutorial _____________________________: Glia 2001 Nov;36(2):180-90 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Immune function of astrocytes.Dong Y, Benveniste EN.Department of Cell Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0005, USA.Astrocytes are the major glial cell within the central nervous system (CNS) and have a number of important physiological properties related to CNS homeostasis. The aspect of astrocyte biology addressed in this review article is the astrocyte as an immunocompetent cell within the brain. The capacity of astrocytes to express class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) antigens and costimulatory molecules (B7 and CD40) that are critical for antigen presentation and T-cell activation are discussed. The functional role of astrocytes as immune effector cells and how this may influence aspects of inflammation and immune reactivity within the brain follows, emphasizing the involvement of astrocytes in promoting Th2 responses. The ability of astrocytes to produce a wide array of chemokines and cytokines is discussed, with an emphasis on the immunological properties of these mediators. The significance of astrocytic antigen presentation and chemokine/cytokine production to neurological diseases with an immunological component is described. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Publication Types: � Review � Review, Academic ___________________________________Psychosom Med 2001 Nov-Dec;63(6):959-65 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Phobic anxiety changes the function of brain-gut axis in irritable bowel syndrome.Blomhoff S, Spetalen S, Jacobsen MB, Malt UF.Department of Psychosomatic and Behavioral Medicine, National Hospital, Oslo, Norway. svein.blomhoff###riskshospitalet.noOBJECTIVE: Disease severity in the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is highly influenced by psychiatric comorbidity. The mechanism of this influence is generally unknown, even if the brain-gut axis seems to be involved. Recent research has indicated that IBS patients have aberrant perception of visceral stimuli in the CNS. We compared IBS patients with and without comorbid phobic anxiety to see if the comorbid disorder influenced brain information processing of auditory stimuli, and looked for possible consequences with respect to visceral sensitivity thresholds and disease severity. METHODS: Eleven female patients with IBS with comorbid phobic anxiety disorder were compared with 22 age-matched female IBS patients without such comorbidity. The groups were compared with respect to event-related potentials (ERP), auditory-presented words with emotional contents, barostat-assessed visceral sensitivity thresholds, and symptom levels the last week before assessment. RESULTS: The comorbid group had a significantly enhanced first negative ERP wave (N1) to all stimuli, indicating increased use of brain attentional resources. It also had increased visceral threshold for the sensation of gas, and reduced gas-stool and gas-discomfort tolerances compared with the noncomorbid group. Enhanced N1 amplitude at the frontal electrode and reduced gas-stools tolerance significantly predicted subjective gas complaints, explaining 47% of the symptom variation. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests an association between information processing in the frontal brain and visceral sensitivity characteristics in IBS patients, and indicates that subjective disease-related symptomatology is predicted by brain perceptual characteristics. The findings indicate that an interaction between IBS-related and anxiety-related hyperreactivity in the frontal brain may constitute a psychophysiological mechanism for the contribution of psychiatric comorbidity to severity and duration of the irritable bowel syndrome.PMID: 11719635 [PubMed - in process] ____________________________________The beat goes on.....Eat well. Think well. Be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
COMMENT:No time to come out and play mcuh today so just a couple of replies: _______________________________________"It seems that MNL theory of IBS would indicate higher levels of circulating antibodies. Maybe Eric's would also? " _______________________________________Just to keep semantically correct, first, I do not espouse any "theory of IBS", only report what is seen and quantifiable clinically by those practitioners I associate with, and with in vivo and in vitro examinations....activation of the inflammatory response system in IBS patients (d's and cyclics...c's have not been looked at much from this perspective). The IRS can be provoked by dietary components directly, and the patients are selected to rule-out the influence of specific antibodies to the provoking foods.Now the IBS patients with positive skin prick tests come up 50% or better of the time with specific IgE to the test-positive substance (PST is about 50% correct) and if you oral challenge those more than 50% *depends on the study* respond with an actual allergic reaction.So there are indeed (in patients with comorbid allergy) circulating antibodies to the provoking substances. BUT that is not considered anything but a comorbidity and has to be set aside as a known mechanism. A REAL comorbidity that has to be isolated and managed, but comorbidity nonetheless.This is also true of IgG and subclasses like IgG4, which then suggest another type of reaction sort of a "delayed allergy" you can think of it as.However the intriguing part has always been the people left when you take out the ones with specific antibodies to a food, and stiil measure IRS activation which can be provoked by diet and which subsides when the provoking substance (food or additive) is removed. AND we are talking about mechanisms other than pseudoallergy and the like, keep in mind, which are normal mechanisms in the smal bowel of even the NON IBS population.While following up on the signs of localized lymphocyte reactions and macrophage involvement, some allergists at a big medical center, affiliated medical school and research center in Sweden recently made a most interesting discovery.Besides pulling the now not unexpected T-cell "markers" out of the gut (after another investigator last year showed lymphocytic involvement in small bowel biopsies), they found....IgE...in the small bowel in patients whose symptoms met the ROME II criteria, were provoked directly by double blind food challenge (cannot get more blinded than direct installation into the small bowel by in dwelling catheter...) .So this is intriguing since all these patients had NO circulating IgE antibodies to the foods which provoked the reactions yet it was recovered from the small bowel, where one expects to find (oversimplified) IgA, for instance, Not IgE.Now this was consistent with an investigation they did which was similar a couple years ago in patients whose GI symptoms (gas, diarrhea, pain etc which would be interpreted clincially as "IBS" ) were proven to be (among other things) milk-provoked and who had no detectable milk ALLERGY. As I recall IgE was implicated in the small bowel as well, and they also found it in some of the asymptomatic controls...suggesting an immunoprotective mechanism which needs to be examined which may not conform to the existing rules about immune response and the gut.I have read some studies where people barked up the tree of circulating markers of IRS activation and recall vaguely that the results are equivocal when one goes looking for "cell types". I will have to go back through my volumes and find that for you when I get a chance. What is more pertinent, since ALLERGY in the classic sense has to be avoided when looking at the mechanisms, are specific mediators, and (in the view of several immunologists O know who study allergy vs intolerance): complement.But that diagram in that article I posted is a pretty good schematic of the system excpet it needs that inclusion oc nin-fixed immunocyte activation to be complete. This is so new it was not verified when that tutorial was written, only suggested by in vitro results and various indirect in vivo rsults over the year.I think the docs at Sahlgrens intend to publish their latest work including the t-cell and IgE material at some point but I did not ask them when...only they said they intend to...but the line of examination is very time consuming and tedious due to how the challenges have to be done, and the time involved in between to make sure they are individually valid, and the fact that you have to have a subject that allows you to shove tubes into their small bowel long term. So they are using laparoscopic entry now as well, suggesting it is easier to do. _____________________________________"Thanks for all the information Guys you have given me a different outlook on IBS and also a different outlook on life.... " _______________________________________That IS the point...there are many people studying the Syndrome of IBS from several perspectives. And there are differing protocols as a result of those perspectives. This is the rule more than the exception in the "syndrome phase" of disease entities.So these perspectives produce different views which, if you concolidate them, you will find a core of knowledge about whatever is being discussed which is common and therein lies the kernel of at least what is agreed upon by all parties from all perspectives.And each person and each doctor and each dietician and each therapist in their own way seeks to help, to share what they have learned as precisely as possible to the potential benefit of the patient. I don't think that the people here who spend time as some of us do, are making a wise cost-benefit investment for oursleves as far as perosnal gain goes. This is way too small an "audience" to achieve that.It is an audience of unique need. An audience of some who are not only among the most frustrated and long suffering and highest treatment failure rate BUT an audience of people who are strongly self-directed.So regardless of perspective, I know for myself and I beleive for others who spend time here we could spend elsewhere more "cost effectively" from a personal perspective, the primary motive is to provide some info and guidance to those who are self directed enough to take the time to come here and ask for it and then actually do something with it to their own benefit.One cannot be all things to all people, so there will be those whom a given person cannot connect with no matter how you carry yourself. And there will be others who will connect immediately. Pretty much the crux of existence and human interraction, no?.
Also, sorry to those who must skip on from time to time...and for repetition, but that which is of value bears repeating. Also, sadly, often simplicity and accuracy are mutually exclusive. Besides, after all these years, verbose is as verbose does.
Eat well, think well, be well ya'll.
AND have a DFD ok?MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
COMMENT:No time to come out and play mcuh today so just a couple of replies: _______________________________________"It seems that MNL theory of IBS would indicate higher levels of circulating antibodies. Maybe Eric's would also? " _______________________________________Just to keep semantically correct, first, I do not espouse any "theory of IBS", only report what is seen and quantifiable clinically by those practitioners I associate with, and with in vivo and in vitro examinations....activation of the inflammatory response system in IBS patients (d's and cyclics...c's have not been looked at much from this perspective). The IRS can be provoked by dietary components directly, and the patients are selected to rule-out the influence of specific antibodies to the provoking foods.Now the IBS patients with positive skin prick tests come up 50% or better of the time with specific IgE to the test-positive substance (PST is about 50% correct) and if you oral challenge those more than 50% *depends on the study* respond with an actual allergic reaction.So there are indeed (in patients with comorbid allergy) circulating antibodies to the provoking substances. BUT that is not considered anything but a comorbidity and has to be set aside as a known mechanism. A REAL comorbidity that has to be isolated and managed, but comorbidity nonetheless.This is also true of IgG and subclasses like IgG4, which then suggest another type of reaction sort of a "delayed allergy" you can think of it as.However the intriguing part has always been the people left when you take out the ones with specific antibodies to a food, and stiil measure IRS activation which can be provoked by diet and which subsides when the provoking substance (food or additive) is removed. AND we are talking about mechanisms other than pseudoallergy and the like, keep in mind, which are normal mechanisms in the smal bowel of even the NON IBS population.While following up on the signs of localized lymphocyte reactions and macrophage involvement, some allergists at a big medical center, affiliated medical school and research center in Sweden recently made a most interesting discovery.Besides pulling the now not unexpected T-cell "markers" out of the gut (after another investigator last year showed lymphocytic involvement in small bowel biopsies), they found....IgE...in the small bowel in patients whose symptoms met the ROME II criteria, were provoked directly by double blind food challenge (cannot get more blinded than direct installation into the small bowel by in dwelling catheter...) .So this is intriguing since all these patients had NO circulating IgE antibodies to the foods which provoked the reactions yet it was recovered from the small bowel, where one expects to find (oversimplified) IgA, for instance, Not IgE.Now this was consistent with an investigation they did which was similar a couple years ago in patients whose GI symptoms (gas, diarrhea, pain etc which would be interpreted clincially as "IBS" ) were proven to be (among other things) milk-provoked and who had no detectable milk ALLERGY. As I recall IgE was implicated in the small bowel as well, and they also found it in some of the asymptomatic controls...suggesting an immunoprotective mechanism which needs to be examined which may not conform to the existing rules about immune response and the gut.I have read some studies where people barked up the tree of circulating markers of IRS activation and recall vaguely that the results are equivocal when one goes looking for "cell types". I will have to go back through my volumes and find that for you when I get a chance. What is more pertinent, since ALLERGY in the classic sense has to be avoided when looking at the mechanisms, are specific mediators, and (in the view of several immunologists O know who study allergy vs intolerance): complement.But that diagram in that article I posted is a pretty good schematic of the system excpet it needs that inclusion oc nin-fixed immunocyte activation to be complete. This is so new it was not verified when that tutorial was written, only suggested by in vitro results and various indirect in vivo rsults over the year.I think the docs at Sahlgrens intend to publish their latest work including the t-cell and IgE material at some point but I did not ask them when...only they said they intend to...but the line of examination is very time consuming and tedious due to how the challenges have to be done, and the time involved in between to make sure they are individually valid, and the fact that you have to have a subject that allows you to shove tubes into their small bowel long term. So they are using laparoscopic entry now as well, suggesting it is easier to do. _____________________________________"Thanks for all the information Guys you have given me a different outlook on IBS and also a different outlook on life.... " _______________________________________That IS the point...there are many people studying the Syndrome of IBS from several perspectives. And there are differing protocols as a result of those perspectives. This is the rule more than the exception in the "syndrome phase" of disease entities.So these perspectives produce different views which, if you concolidate them, you will find a core of knowledge about whatever is being discussed which is common and therein lies the kernel of at least what is agreed upon by all parties from all perspectives.And each person and each doctor and each dietician and each therapist in their own way seeks to help, to share what they have learned as precisely as possible to the potential benefit of the patient. I don't think that the people here who spend time as some of us do, are making a wise cost-benefit investment for oursleves as far as perosnal gain goes. This is way too small an "audience" to achieve that.It is an audience of unique need. An audience of some who are not only among the most frustrated and long suffering and highest treatment failure rate BUT an audience of people who are strongly self-directed.So regardless of perspective, I know for myself and I beleive for others who spend time here we could spend elsewhere more "cost effectively" from a personal perspective, the primary motive is to provide some info and guidance to those who are self directed enough to take the time to come here and ask for it and then actually do something with it to their own benefit.One cannot be all things to all people, so there will be those whom a given person cannot connect with no matter how you carry yourself. And there will be others who will connect immediately. Pretty much the crux of existence and human interraction, no?.
Also, sorry to those who must skip on from time to time...and for repetition, but that which is of value bears repeating. Also, sadly, often simplicity and accuracy are mutually exclusive. Besides, after all these years, verbose is as verbose does.
Eat well, think well, be well ya'll.
AND have a DFD ok?MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
LML: ___________________________________"Mike ... since I'm not in the 70% D category, andI can eat most anything if I keep the amounts small, much of your information doesn't seem to apply to me specifically. And since IBS is a "syndrome" rather than a disease, I wouldn't expect all of anyone's ideas to apply to all sufferers. " ____________________________________Oh yeah you be so 100% right. This is why I qualify carefully the subjects addressed and the different symptom sets and subpopulations that presently are all lumped-together under the Syndrome Sign of "IBS". There are, it is becoming more obvious all the time, some isolatable etiologies for specific symptoms and sets of symptoms that, when finally fully understood, are going to reveal "disease". From that point forward those people will then be called (Disease or Etiology A), and the total populaton counted as inscrutable-etiology, thus "IBS", will be reduced. Not everyone on all sides agrees that this is how it is, but from watching the evolution historically of other syndromes (from literature and during my own life) eventually this is where it all ends up when the core of people without agendas on either side of the issue size it all up and publish their manifestos.It is far easier to asses the patients who suffer the symptom sets which are d-dominated or cyclic-dominated from a causal viewpoint simply because the body has developed good and sound reasons and many mechanisms which are designed to INTENTIONALLY evacuate the GI tract. Alot is known about those mechanisms, and they all involve an integrated group of systems which act in consort, each can be primary at any given time but they always act in consort. That would the the digestive system, the enteric nervous system, the immune system, the central nervous system, the endocrine system, the exocrine system, and even other portions of the peripheral nervous system.It is not that difficult to study neural function, endocrine function, immune function etc and observe events. The events observable and quantifiable in the 70% "majority" are going to be understood in full sooner, simply because some of the mechanisms are simply already known. One has to isolate what provokes the responses, where is the origin of the response at different times and in repsosne to different provocations, then eventually piece them together as to the "why" information.This is one reason that there are more, and more effective, modalities right now for the people who evacuate than the people who retain, so to speak.Just ONE little indicator of where how the study of the symptoms experienced by IBS-C types has to diverge from the rest is revealed here **: ____________________________Gut 2001 Jan;48(1) An exaggerated sensory component of the gastrocolonic response in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.Simren M, Abrahamsson H, Bjornsson ESDepartment of Internal Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden.[Record supplied by publisher]BACKGROUND/AIMS: Visceral hypersensitivity is a feature of the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Postprandial symptoms are common in these patients. The effects of nutrients on colonic perception in IBS are incompletely understood. SUBJECTS: We studied 13 healthy subjects and 16 patients with IBS-eight had diarrhoea predominant (IBS-D) and eight constipation predominant (IBS-C) IBS. METHODS: Colonic perception thresholds to balloon distension and viscerosomatic referral pattern were assessed before and after duodenal infusion of lipid or saline, respectively. At the end of the infusions, plasma levels of gastrointestinal peptides were determined. RESULTS: Lipids lowered the thresholds for first sensation, gas, discomfort, and pain in the IBS group but only for gas in the control group. The percent reduction in thresholds for gas and pain after lipids was greater in the IBS and IBS-D groups but not in the IBS-C group compared with controls. IBS patients had an increased area of referred discomfort and pain after lipids compared with before infusion whereas the referral area remained unchanged in controls. No group differences in colonic tone or compliance were observed. In both groups higher levels of cholecystokinin, pancreatic polypeptide, peptide YY, vasoactive intestinal polypeptide, and neuropeptide Y were seen after lipids. **Motilin levels were higher in patients and differences in the subgroups were observed. **Levels of corticotrophin releasing factor were lower in the constipated group than in the diarrhoea group. CONCLUSIONS: Postprandial symptoms in IBS patients may be explained in part by a nutrient dependent exaggerated sensory component of the gastrocolonic response.PMID: 11115818 ____________________________So there is a chemical (CRF) red flag (on of them)which in this case distinctly separates the two groups chosen to be studied. While it may not be found to be some silver-bullet that is the main point of divergency, it points out that one trail is marked with bread-crumbs and one trail is marked with Reeses Pieces.Which of course is not meant to suggest that C-types are actually victims of alien abduction or some genetic relationship to E.T. (but do think about phoning home occassionally, ok?), only that there are reasons to explore which will explain way, for example since I work with the IRS investigators, even some C-types do show a (lesser overall)occurrence of dietary related PROVOCATION of symptoms, esp. pain or the bloating sensations, but quite the opposite of an evacuatory response which normally accompanies the types of IRS activation seen in the other subpopulations and the mediators which account for it can be isolated in the majority (d side)....in fact quite the opposite occurs vis a vis reduced motility in the lower colon.So if for no other reason than that it has been clear that something more, or differnt, is afoot which will distinguish these souls...CRF is merely one indicator (beyond symptoms) that this is the case.The way things work though is that in a way the C-types are going to be of a lower-order in the research pecking order if for no other reason that (at least in the USA) they represent a smaller market so when funding the search for solutions all sources of $$$ have a tendency to be driven to solving the problem experienced by the biggest market first.It kind of sux that this is the way it is, as in a perfect world "all would be equal" in the eyes of the medical world. Not that way, but thankfully there ARE enough victims(millions) that work DOES get funded and DOES go on regarding THAT distinct subpopulation too.Eat well. Think well. be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
LML: ___________________________________"Mike ... since I'm not in the 70% D category, andI can eat most anything if I keep the amounts small, much of your information doesn't seem to apply to me specifically. And since IBS is a "syndrome" rather than a disease, I wouldn't expect all of anyone's ideas to apply to all sufferers. " ____________________________________Oh yeah you be so 100% right. This is why I qualify carefully the subjects addressed and the different symptom sets and subpopulations that presently are all lumped-together under the Syndrome Sign of "IBS". There are, it is becoming more obvious all the time, some isolatable etiologies for specific symptoms and sets of symptoms that, when finally fully understood, are going to reveal "disease". From that point forward those people will then be called (Disease or Etiology A), and the total populaton counted as inscrutable-etiology, thus "IBS", will be reduced. Not everyone on all sides agrees that this is how it is, but from watching the evolution historically of other syndromes (from literature and during my own life) eventually this is where it all ends up when the core of people without agendas on either side of the issue size it all up and publish their manifestos.It is far easier to asses the patients who suffer the symptom sets which are d-dominated or cyclic-dominated from a causal viewpoint simply because the body has developed good and sound reasons and many mechanisms which are designed to INTENTIONALLY evacuate the GI tract. Alot is known about those mechanisms, and they all involve an integrated group of systems which act in consort, each can be primary at any given time but they always act in consort. That would the the digestive system, the enteric nervous system, the immune system, the central nervous system, the endocrine system, the exocrine system, and even other portions of the peripheral nervous system.It is not that difficult to study neural function, endocrine function, immune function etc and observe events. The events observable and quantifiable in the 70% "majority" are going to be understood in full sooner, simply because some of the mechanisms are simply already known. One has to isolate what provokes the responses, where is the origin of the response at different times and in repsosne to different provocations, then eventually piece them together as to the "why" information.This is one reason that there are more, and more effective, modalities right now for the people who evacuate than the people who retain, so to speak.Just ONE little indicator of where how the study of the symptoms experienced by IBS-C types has to diverge from the rest is revealed here **: ____________________________Gut 2001 Jan;48(1) An exaggerated sensory component of the gastrocolonic response in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.Simren M, Abrahamsson H, Bjornsson ESDepartment of Internal Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden.[Record supplied by publisher]BACKGROUND/AIMS: Visceral hypersensitivity is a feature of the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Postprandial symptoms are common in these patients. The effects of nutrients on colonic perception in IBS are incompletely understood. SUBJECTS: We studied 13 healthy subjects and 16 patients with IBS-eight had diarrhoea predominant (IBS-D) and eight constipation predominant (IBS-C) IBS. METHODS: Colonic perception thresholds to balloon distension and viscerosomatic referral pattern were assessed before and after duodenal infusion of lipid or saline, respectively. At the end of the infusions, plasma levels of gastrointestinal peptides were determined. RESULTS: Lipids lowered the thresholds for first sensation, gas, discomfort, and pain in the IBS group but only for gas in the control group. The percent reduction in thresholds for gas and pain after lipids was greater in the IBS and IBS-D groups but not in the IBS-C group compared with controls. IBS patients had an increased area of referred discomfort and pain after lipids compared with before infusion whereas the referral area remained unchanged in controls. No group differences in colonic tone or compliance were observed. In both groups higher levels of cholecystokinin, pancreatic polypeptide, peptide YY, vasoactive intestinal polypeptide, and neuropeptide Y were seen after lipids. **Motilin levels were higher in patients and differences in the subgroups were observed. **Levels of corticotrophin releasing factor were lower in the constipated group than in the diarrhoea group. CONCLUSIONS: Postprandial symptoms in IBS patients may be explained in part by a nutrient dependent exaggerated sensory component of the gastrocolonic response.PMID: 11115818 ____________________________So there is a chemical (CRF) red flag (on of them)which in this case distinctly separates the two groups chosen to be studied. While it may not be found to be some silver-bullet that is the main point of divergency, it points out that one trail is marked with bread-crumbs and one trail is marked with Reeses Pieces.Which of course is not meant to suggest that C-types are actually victims of alien abduction or some genetic relationship to E.T. (but do think about phoning home occassionally, ok?), only that there are reasons to explore which will explain way, for example since I work with the IRS investigators, even some C-types do show a (lesser overall)occurrence of dietary related PROVOCATION of symptoms, esp. pain or the bloating sensations, but quite the opposite of an evacuatory response which normally accompanies the types of IRS activation seen in the other subpopulations and the mediators which account for it can be isolated in the majority (d side)....in fact quite the opposite occurs vis a vis reduced motility in the lower colon.So if for no other reason than that it has been clear that something more, or differnt, is afoot which will distinguish these souls...CRF is merely one indicator (beyond symptoms) that this is the case.The way things work though is that in a way the C-types are going to be of a lower-order in the research pecking order if for no other reason that (at least in the USA) they represent a smaller market so when funding the search for solutions all sources of $$$ have a tendency to be driven to solving the problem experienced by the biggest market first.It kind of sux that this is the way it is, as in a perfect world "all would be equal" in the eyes of the medical world. Not that way, but thankfully there ARE enough victims(millions) that work DOES get funded and DOES go on regarding THAT distinct subpopulation too.Eat well. Think well. be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Oh God I missed this....LMAO _____________________________________"I don't think either Eric or Mike has an ego problem..." _____________________________________Hell, no. My ego bumps into his ego. His ego bumps into my ego. They fall down. No problem.
Just remember, where nothing is sure, everything is possible, and we will all be OK.Live well and CARE!!!!MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Oh God I missed this....LMAO _____________________________________"I don't think either Eric or Mike has an ego problem..." _____________________________________Hell, no. My ego bumps into his ego. His ego bumps into my ego. They fall down. No problem.
Just remember, where nothing is sure, everything is possible, and we will all be OK.Live well and CARE!!!!MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Hi Careening. Just a tip or two. __________________________________________"well I don't read Mike's I just start lookin for the scroll button " __________________________________________
Left mouse button, pull the bar down on right fast when my name appears. If you read the book(s) I recommend and get a copy of the abstracts related to the subject which I whittled down from hundreds to about 40 pages and have offered to send people on request (the ones who wanted the stuff and request it always have gotten it sent to them). Anyway, read those, or at least a book on the subkect, then you will not only be free of my meanderings but not miss anything either.Since I have posted on the subject, one way or the aother, about 3,800 times, that is indeed too much for one to bear.Now the downside is that Professor Brostoff in this book"FOOD ALLERGIES AND FOOD INTOLERANCE: THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO THEIR IDENTIFICTION AND TREATMENT", Professor Jonathan Brostoff (M.D.. Allergy, Immunology and Environmental Medicine, Kings' College, London)http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/089...r=2-1/102-64875 08-3420903[/URL]has created over 460 pages to grind through to explain the subject thoroughly to patients, and in this book for doctors "Food Allergy and Food Intolerance" (out of print but the new edition is due in the next 60 days) 1,032 pages on the subject were required tio explain it to doctors.Sadly, brevity and accuracy are not synonymous, as is evidenced by many posts I read, nor can all things physiologic be reduced to a comfy sound bite. I wish they could as my 2 fingers would not be bigger than my thumbs.
It is difficult to condense the information from the publications represented by at least 40 pages of just the abstracts, plus at least 1,500 pages of just those two books, plus Parhams' 400 page Immunology primer I try to study to just learn the rudiments, plus hundreds of pages of investigations by people coming at it from other directions and integrate the information, into cogent 3-4 sentence paragraphs. I am just Not good enough to do it and be accurate. _______________________________________"Mike's arguement: Some food you eat can make your IBS worse so don't eat them. He and some scientists have decided to call this an allergy or an intolerance. Which in a nutshell (to me) means nothing. EVERYONE is sensitive or intolerant to some foods. It doesn't take a scientist or a study to tell you to avoid food that bugs you so I don't really know why he goes on and on and ON AND ON. (You don't need to take the interstate when the gravel road will do.) __________________________________In this case the gravel road has taken you to the wrong place. But you do not know it since you looked at the highway and decided the gravel road was easier to follow, and you know where the roads go already anyway. That's your privilege, of course, but does not mean that you are correct in your assessment of "the road not taken".So if you read what I wrote, better still the books and articles, you would know that what you say these investigators and clincians know is NOT what I say. In fact you are not even close.But it is certainly your right to misunderstand if you choose, and justify it in the manner you have. if you were someone responsible for caring for IBS patients I would respond differently, as you would have an ethical obligation which you do not have. So there is not much to say except point out an error. ____________________________________"...he has to convince Eric (and others who may read the posts) that he's right when there is little evidence that he is. At least this is how it looks to me " ____________________________________Well, of course it does. How could it not loook that way to you?If you do not study a subject you cannot elucidate it. Since you acknowledge that you do not study it, nor can you bear to read what someone writes who works with people who do know the subject (I don't know anything...I repeat what I learn, see, read, hear etc by those who practice medicien in this area) and you are intuitavely more knowledgeable about it than all of them, then of course the case is closed. Far be it from me to go on about it.However, since that is not the way it really is, I personally must continue to try to help those who do wish to understand what is known on the subject to do so int he only way I know how. And those who do not, simply do not. _____________________________________"You'r gonna be in big trouble when Mike sees this . Sit back and get ready for a long reply." _____________________________________Naw, that's about it. Eat well. Think Well. be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Hi Careening. Just a tip or two. __________________________________________"well I don't read Mike's I just start lookin for the scroll button " __________________________________________
Left mouse button, pull the bar down on right fast when my name appears. If you read the book(s) I recommend and get a copy of the abstracts related to the subject which I whittled down from hundreds to about 40 pages and have offered to send people on request (the ones who wanted the stuff and request it always have gotten it sent to them). Anyway, read those, or at least a book on the subkect, then you will not only be free of my meanderings but not miss anything either.Since I have posted on the subject, one way or the aother, about 3,800 times, that is indeed too much for one to bear.Now the downside is that Professor Brostoff in this book"FOOD ALLERGIES AND FOOD INTOLERANCE: THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO THEIR IDENTIFICTION AND TREATMENT", Professor Jonathan Brostoff (M.D.. Allergy, Immunology and Environmental Medicine, Kings' College, London)http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/089...r=2-1/102-64875 08-3420903[/URL]has created over 460 pages to grind through to explain the subject thoroughly to patients, and in this book for doctors "Food Allergy and Food Intolerance" (out of print but the new edition is due in the next 60 days) 1,032 pages on the subject were required tio explain it to doctors.Sadly, brevity and accuracy are not synonymous, as is evidenced by many posts I read, nor can all things physiologic be reduced to a comfy sound bite. I wish they could as my 2 fingers would not be bigger than my thumbs.
It is difficult to condense the information from the publications represented by at least 40 pages of just the abstracts, plus at least 1,500 pages of just those two books, plus Parhams' 400 page Immunology primer I try to study to just learn the rudiments, plus hundreds of pages of investigations by people coming at it from other directions and integrate the information, into cogent 3-4 sentence paragraphs. I am just Not good enough to do it and be accurate. _______________________________________"Mike's arguement: Some food you eat can make your IBS worse so don't eat them. He and some scientists have decided to call this an allergy or an intolerance. Which in a nutshell (to me) means nothing. EVERYONE is sensitive or intolerant to some foods. It doesn't take a scientist or a study to tell you to avoid food that bugs you so I don't really know why he goes on and on and ON AND ON. (You don't need to take the interstate when the gravel road will do.) __________________________________In this case the gravel road has taken you to the wrong place. But you do not know it since you looked at the highway and decided the gravel road was easier to follow, and you know where the roads go already anyway. That's your privilege, of course, but does not mean that you are correct in your assessment of "the road not taken".So if you read what I wrote, better still the books and articles, you would know that what you say these investigators and clincians know is NOT what I say. In fact you are not even close.But it is certainly your right to misunderstand if you choose, and justify it in the manner you have. if you were someone responsible for caring for IBS patients I would respond differently, as you would have an ethical obligation which you do not have. So there is not much to say except point out an error. ____________________________________"...he has to convince Eric (and others who may read the posts) that he's right when there is little evidence that he is. At least this is how it looks to me " ____________________________________Well, of course it does. How could it not loook that way to you?If you do not study a subject you cannot elucidate it. Since you acknowledge that you do not study it, nor can you bear to read what someone writes who works with people who do know the subject (I don't know anything...I repeat what I learn, see, read, hear etc by those who practice medicien in this area) and you are intuitavely more knowledgeable about it than all of them, then of course the case is closed. Far be it from me to go on about it.However, since that is not the way it really is, I personally must continue to try to help those who do wish to understand what is known on the subject to do so int he only way I know how. And those who do not, simply do not. _____________________________________"You'r gonna be in big trouble when Mike sees this . Sit back and get ready for a long reply." _____________________________________Naw, that's about it. Eat well. Think Well. be well.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
Chillin' In St. Louie, Huey!Donna....Glad to here you are still A-OK.
Knew you could and would!Beautiful cold drive up here from FLA. They never got the transmission back in my car before I left....not one valve body in the whole USA!...backordered from the Land of Rising Sun I guess.So I just rented a Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo 4x4, loaded 'er up and Shouted "Let It Snow!" at the sky....so here I am 1,200 miles of perfect sunshine later sitting in the Marriott watching the Planes take off until Sunday.Nice town...RAMS sure have a nice place...love the dome...Wayne Huizenga take note pleaseI have this horrible lap top so there will be few words. Lucky you, happy thread.JULIA and TR illustrate the diversity of what is being found to be going in in the bodies of peole who have been labelled "IBS patients". I have posted before in detail how the evolution of knowledge about this syndrome is just like all syndromes before it.The most parallel is COPD (see the Merck Manual)...there was time when ASTHMA was considered TOTALLY stress and psychosomatic-based and look how wrong everyone was with that belief...as technology evolves mechanisms reveal themsleves.As technology advances, finding that symptoms of a syndrome can be provoked and mediated by different mechanisms and produce similar but different clinical presentations is, like, old hat.Eventually we learn the different mechanisms and which symptoms each elicits, and how the mechanisms, each one of which comes to be understood to manifest a different disease, can overlap thus forming the different symptom SETS that everyone observed BEFORE they unserstood all the mechanisms.So now we know that COPD is basically (3) distinct diseases (emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and asthma..technically "reversible airways obstruction") each of which produces similar but distinct symptoms from distinct etilogies but they overlap to varying degrees causing the wide array of clinical presentations seen in the syndrome.If one has the presence of mind and patience to read about ALL the different mechanisms involved in ALL the different symptomn sets, and how they overlap, which people call the "symptom based syndrom of IBS" one can step back and observe this same dynamic.Trouble is everyone is so hung up on the word IBS and which etilogy and which symptoms it shoudl represent, and which ones it should not, and which etillogy is included and which is not, people get off on tangents arguing that "Etiology A" is IBS and "Etiology B" is not, or that one or the other des not exist. Who ends up being right depends upon how medicne ends up exlcuiding or including etiologies in its final definition when all the findings are finally found.So it is a debate with no answer...since who will the final authority be(?)When you find a patient whose symptoms of d-type IBS are provoked by an actual allergy to a food, or pseudoallergy, then it is food allergy. If it is happening in addition to some other mechnisms that is NOT allergy (not IgE) then the allergy is comorbid.When you have a patient whose symptoms are provoked by apoptosis of lymphocytes in the small bowel in response to some food or chemical provocation which thus evokes the symptoms the doctor sees as IBS...what is it? Food sensitivity presenting as IBS? Whom do you ask? WHo cares? Don't eat it you won't get sick end of symptoms. Go on with (our) life.
If a patients gut mast cells are armed by specific IgE to a food protein, but she has NO detectable circulating IgE, and she gets stressed out over an exam and her mast cells degranulate and produce symptoms of IBS what is that? Does not fit allergy, stress is a provoking event but so would the subatnce the mast cell is armed to react to if it is eaten, so what is it, since her gut mast cells were armed by a local IgE to something in her diet and she also, at another time, directed an efferent neural stimulus to the armed mast cell, which also would dgeranulate if the food protein were presented. It does not fit any present definition.So what do you want to call that?Those are all documented events which can elicit symptoms of d-type IBS clincially and have all been diagnosed as IBS. And 2 or more may occur together. there are more....those are merely examples.So there is no one separate etiliology as iBs is not a disease it is a syndrome and it is not functional...I don't care how many times doctors come back with what some new non-papal yet weighty encyclical: it is only functional as far as the current technolgy reach is exceeded by the grasp of some as yet unseen mechanism.Just 12 months ago medicine was still publishing the declarations about "proinflammatory response" in IBS as imaginary...some of the same people are now trotting about discussing it as if they are the ones who knew it all along ad nauseaum...And as I said asthma used to be a psychosomatic disease too.So the question is moot since what even the "symptom based" camp of IBS physicians is now studying is causal basis, just as the causal basis physicians were once ridiculed for suggesting there are actual causal-reasons for the symptoms of so-called IBS.But DOGMA dies-hard. Too bad Bruce Willis is not a GI doc.
Time to get somma dem ribs! Wow....and to think I can eat all this stuff now in spite of all the false and misleading information I have been given and which I dispense with impunity!!!if this is placebo therapy, we need more and better placebos!Hey, does anybody know if those Riverboats down there are worth the trip?Whoa lookit that room service menu! Ribs AND Pulled Pork!!!Eat well. Think well. Pig-out well.MNLDOUBLE WHOA!!!! What was that? Moment of silence....Waylon Jennings died today? Only 64? Hmmmm....maybe better eat less of dat pork....
See if they have any rice cakes.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
...your vent may be over but is wholly and without reservation valid.Oh, I am speaking with J here so if my doing so bothers anyone please pull that bar o n the right dwon and I will not offend you. Nor will my inability to type on this crappy portable keyboard.They should take these built in pointing devices and just saw them right off of the bottom of the keyboard. They are in the way.Literally never do people repeat the physiologic mechanisms "suggested" or "proposed" or "assumed" in the same context in which the suppositions are made when they retell them. Nor are they often used except selectively.Instead, for just one of many examples, an animal model of chemical small bowel inflammation which elicits various CNS and ENS effects is discussed, and putative mechanisms postulated.The next thing you see is someone flatly stating that the postulate is fact. This is just as bad science as those who claim that findings which are contrary to their "possible" mechanisms represent less valid conclusions.Many IBS conferences are terribly incomplete from a therapeutics perspective. That one is a good example. In spite of the fact that jejunal isolation studies have shown specific quantified mechanisms for at least one specific mechanism, not possbile but exact and quantified, not only is the material not included as usual the only therapises which can be offered which are claimed to be efficicious are psychological therapies and pharmacotherapy. The most effective prophylactic methods are not taught.So your vent is not out of order, in fact it needs to be repeated loudly and often.For some reason that no one knows, many patients with d-predominant IBS suffer symptoms of IRS activation in the bowel which result in their symptoms which are NOT reliant upon stress to precipitate, yet this is the mosty popular mechanism to postulate about. Since the mechanism of allergy, in the classic definition, is a rule-out comorbidity a major population is not even addressed. The precursor events may be but not limited to dysbiosis, post-infection persistent inflammatory response, or no known (so far) precursor event including childhood abuse nor some intrinsic pathologic obsession with gut function or any other such precursor event.Simply put, for decades no matter how you cut it when you select IBS-d patients and rule out infection, properly constructed dietary therapy has always elicited high rates of symptom reduction up to and including remission. Immunomodulation has been effective time and time again, yet for years this was disnissed as an aberration.All of a sudden now that IRS activation is seen by someone other than one who has studied it all along, all the putative mechanisms and theories are reduced to (1) even-etiology and 100 mediators involved in IRS activation are reduced to (1) and its class of receptors.The closer a dietary protocol studies the patinets possible food or chemical allergy or pseudoallergic reactions and thus isolates and removes those from the diet, then the more accuratley it is able to isolate and remove non-allergic dietary provocation, the higher the rate of symptom reduction from simple avoidance.This is never covered competently in the programs presented to phsyicians in a way that a useable protocol is presented. So an entire "leg" of the three-legged stool of a properly integrated disease management program is left out of most "training" provided to practitioners. And the patients therefore never receive the benefit of how far along this simple and effective and low cost therapeutic modality has become since no one is training American practitioners in these methods, yet.This is wrong. So until it is corrected those who know and understand as we have been trained by those who do know and understand must be proactive in this area. On the other hand we must consider that human nature is to rely upon that which we understand, not that which we do not. This is very true in clinical medicine as well. People are people, white jacket or blue collar.It used to be more difficult to discusss as the problem of food and chemcial intolerances do not follow the standard rules of allergy that everyone understands....and there were no specific markers for non Ige/IgG reactivity. That has also changed.Now there are. And there are in vitro assays which, combined with allergy markers in a complementary fashion, can have dramatic effects with simple instructions and proper adherence by the patient.Since the jejunal isolation techniques have been created, they have by direct challenge to the small bowel mucosa proven that what "food intolerance" practitioners have known clinically for years. There are a lot of people who have, for whatever reason, lost oral tolerance to certain foods and exhibit a direct, abnormal, activation of the inflammatory response syndrome as a consequence. This evokes symptoms that result in the clinical picture, and subsequent "symptom based diagnosis" of IBS. And if you isolate and remove those foods or additives which provoke the symptoms, they simply go away. One simply needs a tool which can separate those with the problem from those who suffer other causal bases for their symptoms. Those tools are available too.So if this happens, and it does, whether the mechanism is local IgE, dysbiosis, "stress", or if the inverse if true (the stres-response is a result of IRS activation), is a matter of isolating each subpopulation. One must, when one sees primary IRS activation in the gut and thus lymphocytic and leukocytic mediator release, zoom-on-up sooner or later to the cerebrospinal fluid/plasma relationsips and see which mediators show up there, what happens to BBB permeability, and find out which comes first, chicken or egg(?)etc.Then you have the missing link which can help the theorizing become factualizing. And not until then.Oh there is always more one could add to this thread but then I would be again discussing realities, rather than morphing the "possble" into dogma.Like you Julia, it was done to me for 30 years too. So you know what? I have seen it done to so many other victims, and I have seen so many recover from what they are still told is "not possible" that I do not really give a damn if someone likes me relating what I have seen or not...fact is fact and theory is theory. I wish that these were more clearly delineated by the profession sometimes, and that more fact which is clinically useful got into the hands of practitioners instead of theory which is not yet, and may never, prove out nor be therpeutically beneficial.So rant on, to the benefit of those patients who would never hear about it otherwise.MAN that pizza was filling...I did forgo the pig.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
...your vent may be over but is wholly and without reservation valid.Oh, I am speaking with J here so if my doing so bothers anyone please pull that bar o n the right dwon and I will not offend you. Nor will my inability to type on this crappy portable keyboard.They should take these built in pointing devices and just saw them right off of the bottom of the keyboard. They are in the way.Literally never do people repeat the physiologic mechanisms "suggested" or "proposed" or "assumed" in the same context in which the suppositions are made when they retell them. Nor are they often used except selectively.Instead, for just one of many examples, an animal model of chemical small bowel inflammation which elicits various CNS and ENS effects is discussed, and putative mechanisms postulated.The next thing you see is someone flatly stating that the postulate is fact. This is just as bad science as those who claim that findings which are contrary to their "possible" mechanisms represent less valid conclusions.Many IBS conferences are terribly incomplete from a therapeutics perspective. That one is a good example. In spite of the fact that jejunal isolation studies have shown specific quantified mechanisms for at least one specific mechanism, not possbile but exact and quantified, not only is the material not included as usual the only therapises which can be offered which are claimed to be efficicious are psychological therapies and pharmacotherapy. The most effective prophylactic methods are not taught.So your vent is not out of order, in fact it needs to be repeated loudly and often.For some reason that no one knows, many patients with d-predominant IBS suffer symptoms of IRS activation in the bowel which result in their symptoms which are NOT reliant upon stress to precipitate, yet this is the mosty popular mechanism to postulate about. Since the mechanism of allergy, in the classic definition, is a rule-out comorbidity a major population is not even addressed. The precursor events may be but not limited to dysbiosis, post-infection persistent inflammatory response, or no known (so far) precursor event including childhood abuse nor some intrinsic pathologic obsession with gut function or any other such precursor event.Simply put, for decades no matter how you cut it when you select IBS-d patients and rule out infection, properly constructed dietary therapy has always elicited high rates of symptom reduction up to and including remission. Immunomodulation has been effective time and time again, yet for years this was disnissed as an aberration.All of a sudden now that IRS activation is seen by someone other than one who has studied it all along, all the putative mechanisms and theories are reduced to (1) even-etiology and 100 mediators involved in IRS activation are reduced to (1) and its class of receptors.The closer a dietary protocol studies the patinets possible food or chemical allergy or pseudoallergic reactions and thus isolates and removes those from the diet, then the more accuratley it is able to isolate and remove non-allergic dietary provocation, the higher the rate of symptom reduction from simple avoidance.This is never covered competently in the programs presented to phsyicians in a way that a useable protocol is presented. So an entire "leg" of the three-legged stool of a properly integrated disease management program is left out of most "training" provided to practitioners. And the patients therefore never receive the benefit of how far along this simple and effective and low cost therapeutic modality has become since no one is training American practitioners in these methods, yet.This is wrong. So until it is corrected those who know and understand as we have been trained by those who do know and understand must be proactive in this area. On the other hand we must consider that human nature is to rely upon that which we understand, not that which we do not. This is very true in clinical medicine as well. People are people, white jacket or blue collar.It used to be more difficult to discusss as the problem of food and chemcial intolerances do not follow the standard rules of allergy that everyone understands....and there were no specific markers for non Ige/IgG reactivity. That has also changed.Now there are. And there are in vitro assays which, combined with allergy markers in a complementary fashion, can have dramatic effects with simple instructions and proper adherence by the patient.Since the jejunal isolation techniques have been created, they have by direct challenge to the small bowel mucosa proven that what "food intolerance" practitioners have known clinically for years. There are a lot of people who have, for whatever reason, lost oral tolerance to certain foods and exhibit a direct, abnormal, activation of the inflammatory response syndrome as a consequence. This evokes symptoms that result in the clinical picture, and subsequent "symptom based diagnosis" of IBS. And if you isolate and remove those foods or additives which provoke the symptoms, they simply go away. One simply needs a tool which can separate those with the problem from those who suffer other causal bases for their symptoms. Those tools are available too.So if this happens, and it does, whether the mechanism is local IgE, dysbiosis, "stress", or if the inverse if true (the stres-response is a result of IRS activation), is a matter of isolating each subpopulation. One must, when one sees primary IRS activation in the gut and thus lymphocytic and leukocytic mediator release, zoom-on-up sooner or later to the cerebrospinal fluid/plasma relationsips and see which mediators show up there, what happens to BBB permeability, and find out which comes first, chicken or egg(?)etc.Then you have the missing link which can help the theorizing become factualizing. And not until then.Oh there is always more one could add to this thread but then I would be again discussing realities, rather than morphing the "possble" into dogma.Like you Julia, it was done to me for 30 years too. So you know what? I have seen it done to so many other victims, and I have seen so many recover from what they are still told is "not possible" that I do not really give a damn if someone likes me relating what I have seen or not...fact is fact and theory is theory. I wish that these were more clearly delineated by the profession sometimes, and that more fact which is clinically useful got into the hands of practitioners instead of theory which is not yet, and may never, prove out nor be therpeutically beneficial.So rant on, to the benefit of those patients who would never hear about it otherwise.MAN that pizza was filling...I did forgo the pig.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE: To bypass quickly pull bar at right of screen down quickly and nothing shall offend the eye.AuthorComment.... ____________________________________"You can still have a functional disorder with a pathophysiology, they just have not nailed it down all the way yet. " ___________________________________Pathophysiology and etiology are important distinctions between "functional" (no apparent physical cause at this time) and "non-functional" (identifiable causal basis)Bottom line a condition is "functional" until you have isolated the causal basis. Then it is not functional. Anything othert ahn that is just the semantic persistence born of dogma.If you make a thorough study of the literature you see that eithera. there are subpopulations of so called IBS which have quantifiable mechanisms which precipitate and account for the symptoms they present withb. since the mechanism is quantifiable then the patients are being erroneously diagnosed as having "Irritable Bowel Syndrome" ???So that is for others who care about such things as semantics to argue over their surf-and-turf luncheons or while awaiting their tee time.This is so simple a child of 5 could understand it. Send someone to fetch me a child of five!(credit to G. Marx)Semantics is not disease management. That is what I care about. _____________________________________"During the last decade the concept of unique bi-directionalinteractions between the gut and the brain as an importantfactor in coordinated gut function in health has becomewidely accepted." ______________________________________Nobody ever diagreed with the fact that the brain and gut interraction is essential to gut function so what is the point of trying to make it look like someone is disagreeing. That is not nor ever has been the issue.The issues are the fact that there are over 100 mediators involved in the interraction between the CNS, ENS, IRS and other affected systems which are at work, and that some of these have been accounted for and some have not, and there are some quantifiable mechanisms and there are some which are as yet not, only the manifestations (physical events) are quantified and the reasosn for those events are set forth as asusmptions, presumptions, or theories. Untile they become fact they remain that, theory.One must be able to separate the two when discusiing them with people trying to learn about their disease, not morph them into fact from theory.Since tht must again be repeated, so I repeat. ________________________________________"However, we differ greatly on IBS mechanisms. ________________________________________No, I personally do not "vary" on anything vis a vis the mechanisms or treatment or anything else. I merely reply with what I have been taught by physicians who are experts in a certain mediacal realm which is apllicable to IBS and other conditions, and only those things that I have phsyically seen to be fact which they have set firth and use in their daily work with patients.So if that runs contrary to anything anyone else, here or elsewhere, says, then it just will have to.But I personally have discovered nothing, intimated, nothing, and not done work. I convey what I have witnessed to be effective therapeutically, and the reasons why.If it is known, I merely say so, if it is not known, I say that too.So there is no such thing as "Mike differs" MIKE does not say anything but that I have heard from phsycians, dieticians, or seen with my own eyes.there are only isolating things worth commenting on. _______________________________________"If it was a food and you eliminated it all the symptoms would go away?" _______________________________________Rhetorical question since it is never ONE. When you isolate and remove the patients specific offending foods or chemicals which provoke an IRS response the symptoms go away in direct proportion toa. how thorough and accurate you are at isolating the reactive stuffb. how well the patient adheres to the diet base on that infoorc. how effective your immunomodulation therapy is if the patient is on such a regimen ________________________________________"Also, some of the symptoms in IBS differentiate from food allergy or intolerence." ________________________________________the first is correct, the second is often not correct...you cannot mix the mechanisms or clinical presentation of these two distinct mechanism groups, especially intolerance as this is a general term which can involve up to 8 different mechanisms separatelty or together.Clearly food intolerance is not understood. ______________________________________"...often it is related tomiscommunication between the mind and the gut." _______________________________________Absolutley correct. I never met a doctor or researcher who disputes that statment.But we must always remember that the pictures (from the rudiments of serial contrast gut radiographs up to PEt scans) do not quantify the causal basis of the events they quantify only the events themselves, and you can observe quite clearly the tissue and tissue response to events elsewhere when the eventsd are created. But this is one part, a big part, of the puzzle but far from all of it.Therefore the collective "we" must study all the different ways thhat brain-gut communication can be altered and all the chemicals and hormone classes which can alter function and every mechanism which may elicit said mediator and all affected organs etc etc etc before you can say anything more than generalities about "what" and littel about "why". This is often presumed. __________________________________"For example, the gut is loaded with neurotransmitter serotonin. When pressure receptors inthe gut's lining are stimulated, serotonin is released and starts the reflexive motion ofperistalsis. Dr. Gershon said. This is one of the first mechanisms out of whack in IBS between the gut brain and the brain and back. Serotonin is dysregulating" ___________________________________Ok for the sake of discussion lets just keep ignoring all the other mediators and just look at 5HT. What was just described is one mechanism of latered function.Another is that immunocytes will react in so far at least 3 other specific ways in response to direct provocation by different foods or chemicals in IBS patients when nothing is done but flow those into the small bowel. each patients provoking food may differ. Normal small bowel does not respond in this fashion.Mast cells, for example, deganulate. Lymphocytes accumulating in the lamina propria apoptocize. when this happens LLOK AT ALL THE MEDIATIORS that are RELEASED into the gut from these cells IN ADDITION TO 5HT. Directly into the lumen and within the lamina propria. You will also see, for example, PAF which will activate the platelets which are withing the microvasculature and then dump their mediators....amiong which is of course a vast storehouse of the ubiquitous 5HT. Then you will understand ANOTHER mechanism which occurs in patients like, say Julia or myself, or Donna or WashoeLisa.So evcen if we look NO further, there are AT least (3) different ways of invoking an IRS response, altered neural input, immunologic mechanisms like local IgE in the small bowel, cytotoxic lymphocyte reaction, and we have not gon on to the difect-chemical reactions upon immunocytes to go for (3)< and then what lies beyond.This is why a diagram which illustrates how closely the CNS, ENS, and IRS are interdepepndent is essntial to understanding the boradest view of the mechsnisms which are so far knonw to be "active in IBS"...and that it is not idolated to aberrant efferent and afferent stimuli alone.Besides, no one yet can explain exactly why these mechnisms "dysregulate" since there are studies that ned to be done on the environment within which the brain and spinal cord tissue dwells which have not even been atarted yet to see which comes first and when CNS activation, or IRS activatio or ENS activation OR is it (more likely) different origin at different times.ALSO....repeating the same post about post-infective or post-inflmmatory event persistent inflammatory response merely keeps posting the same thing: one OTHER posssible mechanism, unique to the fact that a specific precursor event can be isolated by history which may involve a peristent disruption in the gut immune function following that precursor event.Nobody anywhere argues that either. It is one MORE smoking gun which just makes my point perfectly for me:the subpopulations of so called IBS victims can be isolated, and specific mechanisms which elicit dysfunction may be unique to each population..or is there a commoon thread or etiology which is merely activated by different precursor events??NO one knows yet.See here is an example. This statement does not mean anything except exactly what it says: __________________________________"The nerves in the gut wall are hypersensitve to stimuli" ___________________________________Nobody anywhwere has argued about that for 15 years I think. The question is what are ALL the mechanisms for this hypersensitivity? herein lies the causals basis for the conditions.Simply put, sometimes it is top down and sometimes it is bottom up and sometimes it is both. Agsin, there appear to be times when it may be neither too! _______________________________________"I highy recommend you read this one for more of the whole picture." ________________________________________I highly recommend you ignore the word WHOLE as the work is very good, very apt, true, and documentable but is another PART(s) of the picture. But whenever information excludes certain known information from others, it cannot be characterized accurately as "WHOLE". In fact that is presumptuoous to even suggest as I never met an immunologist yet in 10 years who claimed to known anything approaching the "whole" of any aspect of immunology or its applications in disease.I have yet to read anywhere the "whole picture" in one place. Such a place does not exist at this time.And if anyone tries to interpret this statment as Mike derogating Dr. Sternberg ignore that too. That is not what I said.
I would say that there are other immunologists just as learned in the field and with just as impressive vitae who would add information to that provided which they consider worthy.We as lay people must keep in mind what at least (6) well known immunologists both here and abroad, who have been at it for 30+ years apiece and are also well published and well appointed, they always remind always remind those they speak to that "What they do NOT understand about the immune system far exceeds that which they DO understand, and even that is open to change at any time."So if learned immunologists assume that position of humility about their own knowledge, I do not think that those of us who are not learned in the subject can say that there is a mecca which contains the whole...most of the whole is still missing!But the pieces parts are very useful
and there are islands of knowledge in the stream. They do need to be bridged, though.Eat well. THINK well. be well and warm!!MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE: To bypass quickly pull bar at right of screen down quickly and nothing shall offend the eye.AuthorComment.... ____________________________________"You can still have a functional disorder with a pathophysiology, they just have not nailed it down all the way yet. " ___________________________________Pathophysiology and etiology are important distinctions between "functional" (no apparent physical cause at this time) and "non-functional" (identifiable causal basis)Bottom line a condition is "functional" until you have isolated the causal basis. Then it is not functional. Anything othert ahn that is just the semantic persistence born of dogma.If you make a thorough study of the literature you see that eithera. there are subpopulations of so called IBS which have quantifiable mechanisms which precipitate and account for the symptoms they present withb. since the mechanism is quantifiable then the patients are being erroneously diagnosed as having "Irritable Bowel Syndrome" ???So that is for others who care about such things as semantics to argue over their surf-and-turf luncheons or while awaiting their tee time.This is so simple a child of 5 could understand it. Send someone to fetch me a child of five!(credit to G. Marx)Semantics is not disease management. That is what I care about. _____________________________________"During the last decade the concept of unique bi-directionalinteractions between the gut and the brain as an importantfactor in coordinated gut function in health has becomewidely accepted." ______________________________________Nobody ever diagreed with the fact that the brain and gut interraction is essential to gut function so what is the point of trying to make it look like someone is disagreeing. That is not nor ever has been the issue.The issues are the fact that there are over 100 mediators involved in the interraction between the CNS, ENS, IRS and other affected systems which are at work, and that some of these have been accounted for and some have not, and there are some quantifiable mechanisms and there are some which are as yet not, only the manifestations (physical events) are quantified and the reasosn for those events are set forth as asusmptions, presumptions, or theories. Untile they become fact they remain that, theory.One must be able to separate the two when discusiing them with people trying to learn about their disease, not morph them into fact from theory.Since tht must again be repeated, so I repeat. ________________________________________"However, we differ greatly on IBS mechanisms. ________________________________________No, I personally do not "vary" on anything vis a vis the mechanisms or treatment or anything else. I merely reply with what I have been taught by physicians who are experts in a certain mediacal realm which is apllicable to IBS and other conditions, and only those things that I have phsyically seen to be fact which they have set firth and use in their daily work with patients.So if that runs contrary to anything anyone else, here or elsewhere, says, then it just will have to.But I personally have discovered nothing, intimated, nothing, and not done work. I convey what I have witnessed to be effective therapeutically, and the reasons why.If it is known, I merely say so, if it is not known, I say that too.So there is no such thing as "Mike differs" MIKE does not say anything but that I have heard from phsycians, dieticians, or seen with my own eyes.there are only isolating things worth commenting on. _______________________________________"If it was a food and you eliminated it all the symptoms would go away?" _______________________________________Rhetorical question since it is never ONE. When you isolate and remove the patients specific offending foods or chemicals which provoke an IRS response the symptoms go away in direct proportion toa. how thorough and accurate you are at isolating the reactive stuffb. how well the patient adheres to the diet base on that infoorc. how effective your immunomodulation therapy is if the patient is on such a regimen ________________________________________"Also, some of the symptoms in IBS differentiate from food allergy or intolerence." ________________________________________the first is correct, the second is often not correct...you cannot mix the mechanisms or clinical presentation of these two distinct mechanism groups, especially intolerance as this is a general term which can involve up to 8 different mechanisms separatelty or together.Clearly food intolerance is not understood. ______________________________________"...often it is related tomiscommunication between the mind and the gut." _______________________________________Absolutley correct. I never met a doctor or researcher who disputes that statment.But we must always remember that the pictures (from the rudiments of serial contrast gut radiographs up to PEt scans) do not quantify the causal basis of the events they quantify only the events themselves, and you can observe quite clearly the tissue and tissue response to events elsewhere when the eventsd are created. But this is one part, a big part, of the puzzle but far from all of it.Therefore the collective "we" must study all the different ways thhat brain-gut communication can be altered and all the chemicals and hormone classes which can alter function and every mechanism which may elicit said mediator and all affected organs etc etc etc before you can say anything more than generalities about "what" and littel about "why". This is often presumed. __________________________________"For example, the gut is loaded with neurotransmitter serotonin. When pressure receptors inthe gut's lining are stimulated, serotonin is released and starts the reflexive motion ofperistalsis. Dr. Gershon said. This is one of the first mechanisms out of whack in IBS between the gut brain and the brain and back. Serotonin is dysregulating" ___________________________________Ok for the sake of discussion lets just keep ignoring all the other mediators and just look at 5HT. What was just described is one mechanism of latered function.Another is that immunocytes will react in so far at least 3 other specific ways in response to direct provocation by different foods or chemicals in IBS patients when nothing is done but flow those into the small bowel. each patients provoking food may differ. Normal small bowel does not respond in this fashion.Mast cells, for example, deganulate. Lymphocytes accumulating in the lamina propria apoptocize. when this happens LLOK AT ALL THE MEDIATIORS that are RELEASED into the gut from these cells IN ADDITION TO 5HT. Directly into the lumen and within the lamina propria. You will also see, for example, PAF which will activate the platelets which are withing the microvasculature and then dump their mediators....amiong which is of course a vast storehouse of the ubiquitous 5HT. Then you will understand ANOTHER mechanism which occurs in patients like, say Julia or myself, or Donna or WashoeLisa.So evcen if we look NO further, there are AT least (3) different ways of invoking an IRS response, altered neural input, immunologic mechanisms like local IgE in the small bowel, cytotoxic lymphocyte reaction, and we have not gon on to the difect-chemical reactions upon immunocytes to go for (3)< and then what lies beyond.This is why a diagram which illustrates how closely the CNS, ENS, and IRS are interdepepndent is essntial to understanding the boradest view of the mechsnisms which are so far knonw to be "active in IBS"...and that it is not idolated to aberrant efferent and afferent stimuli alone.Besides, no one yet can explain exactly why these mechnisms "dysregulate" since there are studies that ned to be done on the environment within which the brain and spinal cord tissue dwells which have not even been atarted yet to see which comes first and when CNS activation, or IRS activatio or ENS activation OR is it (more likely) different origin at different times.ALSO....repeating the same post about post-infective or post-inflmmatory event persistent inflammatory response merely keeps posting the same thing: one OTHER posssible mechanism, unique to the fact that a specific precursor event can be isolated by history which may involve a peristent disruption in the gut immune function following that precursor event.Nobody anywhere argues that either. It is one MORE smoking gun which just makes my point perfectly for me:the subpopulations of so called IBS victims can be isolated, and specific mechanisms which elicit dysfunction may be unique to each population..or is there a commoon thread or etiology which is merely activated by different precursor events??NO one knows yet.See here is an example. This statement does not mean anything except exactly what it says: __________________________________"The nerves in the gut wall are hypersensitve to stimuli" ___________________________________Nobody anywhwere has argued about that for 15 years I think. The question is what are ALL the mechanisms for this hypersensitivity? herein lies the causals basis for the conditions.Simply put, sometimes it is top down and sometimes it is bottom up and sometimes it is both. Agsin, there appear to be times when it may be neither too! _______________________________________"I highy recommend you read this one for more of the whole picture." ________________________________________I highly recommend you ignore the word WHOLE as the work is very good, very apt, true, and documentable but is another PART(s) of the picture. But whenever information excludes certain known information from others, it cannot be characterized accurately as "WHOLE". In fact that is presumptuoous to even suggest as I never met an immunologist yet in 10 years who claimed to known anything approaching the "whole" of any aspect of immunology or its applications in disease.I have yet to read anywhere the "whole picture" in one place. Such a place does not exist at this time.And if anyone tries to interpret this statment as Mike derogating Dr. Sternberg ignore that too. That is not what I said.
I would say that there are other immunologists just as learned in the field and with just as impressive vitae who would add information to that provided which they consider worthy.We as lay people must keep in mind what at least (6) well known immunologists both here and abroad, who have been at it for 30+ years apiece and are also well published and well appointed, they always remind always remind those they speak to that "What they do NOT understand about the immune system far exceeds that which they DO understand, and even that is open to change at any time."So if learned immunologists assume that position of humility about their own knowledge, I do not think that those of us who are not learned in the subject can say that there is a mecca which contains the whole...most of the whole is still missing!But the pieces parts are very useful
and there are islands of knowledge in the stream. They do need to be bridged, though.Eat well. THINK well. be well and warm!!MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
BEFORE DEPARTING FRIGID SAINT LOOIE: ________________________________________"I am not sure you can accurately say most doctors don't know about food allergies or intolerences,..." _________________________________________
If you don't trust me on anything else ever, that's one you can take to the bank.Most doctors (most means majority) have a basic undersatnding or conceptualization of allergy and know next to nothing about non-allergic reactivity to foods, additives, chemicals, etc. Many do not even know that such a thing exists, rather view it as some strange rumors that get shared around darkened campsites in the wild, late at night, when the ghost stories run out, or which were passed down from Gyspy King to Gypsy King and their Old Wives.So yes, anyone can say what was said with absolute accuracy. MOST is not ALL, but it Is most. When you are in a certain industry or business or healthcare service you become more aware than those outside looking in occassionally.[Holy cow...look at that car....does this happen in St. Louis to everyone who parks under a tree? It looks like the entire Pigeon Nation took up residence on it while I was inside the hotel!!! OMIGOD I am gonna need a bulldozer to get that ---- off......]
jeez, always seems to be a pile of it in one form or another to scrape away no matter where ya go!!! Time to go....Have a DFD all.MNL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
OH PS TO JULIA:
HAD ME A GREAT BIG PLATE OF PULLED PORK BARBEQUE FOR DINNER LAST NIGHT WITH A PILE OF BARBEQUE FRIES & 3-4 BOTTLES OF "HEINIE" TO WASH EM DOWN!FEEL LIKE A MILLION BUCKS TODAY!!!I WILL BE BACK HERE AGAIN. GOOD STUFF.On da road agin jes can't wait to get on da road aginMNoWillieN
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,709 Posts
OH PS TO JULIA:
HAD ME A GREAT BIG PLATE OF PULLED PORK BARBEQUE FOR DINNER LAST NIGHT WITH A PILE OF BARBEQUE FRIES & 3-4 BOTTLES OF "HEINIE" TO WASH EM DOWN!FEEL LIKE A MILLION BUCKS TODAY!!!I WILL BE BACK HERE AGAIN. GOOD STUFF.On da road agin jes can't wait to get on da road aginMNoWillieN
 
1 - 20 of 139 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top