UC-Why there is no current medical cure.

We read the same stuff..

Here OM - Not sure if you posted or read this but here in relation to your question of why does IBD always seem to start distally and work up??...

NOTE: This version I believe is written up slightly different.

Spatial organization of bacterial flora in normal and inflamed intestine: A fluorescence in situ hybridization study in mice:
www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v11/i8/1131.htm

Under the adhesion section:

"True adhesion was observed in all animals with colitis. This was characterized by bacteria, which lined the mucosal surface and were located beneath the mucus layer. This true adhesion was found in at least one location in all animals with colitis, but was observed mainly in the distal portion of the colon (Figure 9). Sixty percent of adhesive bacteria were Bacteroides. Invading bacteria Bacteria invading the mucosa were found exclusively in the rectum and distal colon of DSS and IL-10 knockout mice with colitis (Figure 10). The types of invading bacteria were heterogeneous but mainly represented bacteria of the Bacteroides and Erec groups. The proportion of Bacteroides to Erec was more than three to one.

AZY: Said.

"How have you shown this to be true? Cause or effect? There are many effects of UC. There existence doesn't make them a cause. WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE CAUSE IS"

Delving into this deeper seems to be related to the adherence of the biofilm and the amount and type of bacteria.

Also find a discrepancy in what he says,which confuses the issue,for me.

here he says that healthy human controls have no biofilm on the mucosal surface.

http://www.charite.de/arbmkl/vortraege/2004lph_edited_model.pdf

here he says that there are mucosal bacteria in healthy controls

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16000463

But in the end I am still saying that the cause of chronic nature of colitis is the adherent biofilm,which is

not removed by current medications,or the immune system.

Have I proven cause and effect. Not sure.

The adherent fragillis biofilm should not be there in the first place.

Remove the biofilm some how and we might find out.

I am not saying I know the cause as to why the bacteria get through the mucus, or how

the biofilm is formed,or why B. Fragillis is in the biofilm,or why the biofilm is not removed,or even how UC initiates.

But I can speculate the mucus is penetrated,and too many bacteria get to the mucosal surface and they are

not cleared by the innate immune response,nor the following immune cascade.

Well I guess I don't have to speculate that the mucus is penetrated.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23426893

Old Mike

 

Post Edited (Old Mike) : 11/15/2014 12:41:47 PM (GMT-7)

Mark:

Believe have that posted here is the correct link, yours has development attached to it.

Too bad you are on Imuran, if you were not and you saw all the improvement that would really be something.

Never the less, you see improvement over and above that provided by Imuran.

OM

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v417/n6888/full/417552a.html

Might as well add this reply the doc, to keep everything in context.

Biofilms are secondary to an impaired mucus barrier.

Duh:

Well that is what I got back from my email to Dr. Swidsinski.

An impaired mucus barrier implies a lot of things that might go wrong.

He also sent these two studies of which I have seen in the past.

Read the first one carefully, or just the conclusion carefully.

http://www.charite.de/arbmkl/themen/ubersicht/intestinalmicrobiota.pdf

http://www.charite.de/arbmkl/publikationen/2010france.pdf

At any rate I don't know how we  might fix much in an impaired barrier, except for mucus quantity and or viscosity.

There is a possibility that multiple small infections,drained the goblet cells and they made less mucus of poor quality,which let bacteria get to the mucosa.

I have gone on a low surfactant/food emulsifier lifestyle in the past so that did not fix me.

How else can we increase mucus viscosity, protease inhibitors, and possibly ROS inhibitors,of which I have threads.

We can also feed the goblet cells the amino acids that they need to make more mucus, with whey and gelatin.

I have a thread on that also. Possible butyrate but the butyrate enema trial did not work out that great, possible glutamine,dont know.

The basic concept is that the mucus somehow became depleted or too thin in viscosity to exclude the luminal bacteria. If other things are wrong such as antibacterial molecules, I don't know how to fix.

So at this point in time, I will try and re-look at stuff, try and concentrate on mucus viscosity, so far not much

luck, in increasing viscosity. Perhaps some nasal decongestants might do this. Most problems like COPD or Crohns the mucus is too thick, we have the opposite problem.  Most OTC  meds try and thin mucus for COPD or sinus conditions. Dehydration of the mucus will thicken it.

I still have questions that the biofilm is still there even with medication of all types, leading to chronicity.

They remain un-answered.

Old Mike

Post Edited (Old Mike) : 11/25/2014 4:40:23 AM (GMT-7)