Germ etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
Germ etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster

2 Şubat 2017 Perşembe

Germ warfare: the battle for the key to modern vaccines

On 9 October 1964, a baby girl was born at Philadelphia general hospital. She arrived early, when her mother was about 32 weeks pregnant. The baby weighed 3.2lb and was noted to be blue, floppy and not breathing. The only sign of life was her slow heartbeat. Nonetheless, she clung on, and her 17-year-old mother named her.


One month later, the baby was still in the hospital, and a doctor listening with a stethoscope heard a harsh heart murmur. A chest X-ray showed that she had a massively enlarged heart because a hole in the organ was preventing it from pumping blood efficiently. It also emerged that the baby had cataracts blinding both eyes. Later, other signs indicated that she was profoundly deaf.


The baby also suffered from recurring respiratory infections and had trouble gaining weight. A psychologist who assessed her in July 1965 judged the nine-month-old to be the size of a two- or three-month-old infant and at about that stage of development, too. She needed heart surgery if she was going to survive. Just before her first birthday, surgeons made an incision in her chest wall and repaired her heart. After the operation, she remained in hospital. The chronic respiratory infections continued. The baby was 16 months old and weighed just 11lb when she died of pneumonia on 18 February 1966.


The young mother had told the doctors that when she was one month pregnant, she had contracted German measles, also known as rubella.


The early 1960s marked a coming of age for the study of viruses such as the one that causes rubella – tiny infectious agents that invade cells and hijack their machinery in order to reproduce themselves. Biologists, with new tools in hand, were racing to capture viruses in throat swabs or urine or even snippets of organs from infected people and to grow them in lab dishes. Isolating a virus in the lab made it possible to make a vaccine against it. And making antiviral vaccines promised huge inroads against common childhood diseases such as measles, mumps and rubella, along with less common killers including hepatitis. The principle of vaccination is simple: if a person is injected with, or swallows, a tiny amount of a virus – either a killed virus or a weakened live virus – that person will develop antibodies against the virus. Then, if he or she is exposed in the future to the naturally occurring, disease-causing form of the virus, those antibodies will attack the invader and prevent it from causing disease.


But if the concept is simple, making effective vaccines is anything but. In the early 1960s, that reality was all too evident. In 1942, as many as 330,000 US servicemen were exposed to the hepatitis B virus in a yellow fever vaccine that was contaminated with blood plasma from infected donors (the plasma was used to stabilise the vaccine). Around 50,000 of the vaccinated servicemen contracted the liver disease and up to 150 died.


In 1955, a California-based company named Cutter Laboratories made a polio vaccine with the live, disease-causing virus in it. As a result, 192 people were paralysed – many of them children – and 10 died. Every senior US government employee involved in the Cutter incident lost his or her job, right up to the director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the secretary for health, education and welfare.


Then, in the summer of 1961, Americans learned that cells used to manufacture the widely used Salk polio vaccine, harvested from monkey kidneys, harboured a virus named SV40. Tens of millions of American children had already received contaminated injections, and while the jury was still out on the tainted vaccine’s long-term health consequences, the risks were of great concern to regulators in the US and further afield.


It was against this backdrop that, on a drizzly June morning in 1962, a 34-year-old scientist named Leonard Hayflick went to work in his lab at the Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology – an elegant 1890s brownstone tucked in the heart of the University of Pennsylvania’s campus.


A serious, slight man with close-cropped dark hair, Hayflick was a product of working-class Philadelphia and hungry to make his name. He was in love with biology and had come to believe that he was extremely smart – a fact that was far from appreciated. Hayflick’s boss, the polio-vaccine pioneer Hilary Koprowski, saw him as a mere technician, hired to serve up bottles of lab-grown cells to the institute’s scientists.


The ambitious Hayflick was undeterred. That day, he planned to launch a group of human cells that would revolutionise vaccine-making. He was convinced that, compared with monkey cells, which were often laden with viruses, human cells would serve as cleaner, safer vehicles for producing antiviral vaccines.


Several days earlier, a woman living near Stockholm had had an abortion. The eight-inch-long female foetus was wrapped in a sterile green cloth and delivered to a yellow brick outbuilding on the grounds of the National Biological Laboratory in north-west Stockholm. The lungs were removed, packed in ice and flown to the Wistar Institute.



The Wistar Institute in Philadelphia.


The Wistar Institute in Philadelphia. Photograph: The Wistar Institute

Hayflick had been waiting months for this opportunity. These lungs would be the source of the new cells he needed to make antiviral vaccines. Viruses can’t multiply outside living cells, and huge quantities of virus were needed to produce vaccines.


Now, at last, the lungs were here in his bustling second-floor lab, two purplish things floating in clear pink fluid in a glass bottle. They had been sent to Hayflick by a top virologist at the prestigious Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.


Hayflick knew that he was uniquely positioned to produce a long-lasting supply of these cells. He had spent the previous three years perfecting the procedure that would do it.


Hayflick took the lungs into a tiny room just off his lab – what passed for a “sterile” area in 1962. He picked up a pair of tweezers, dipped them in alcohol and passed them through the flame of a Bunsen burner. He waited for them to cool and then, gently, one at a time, lifted the organs and placed them on a petri dish. Each was no larger than his thumb above the knuckle. He began carefully slicing them into innumerable pieces, each smaller than a pinhead.


Hayflick nudged the minute pieces of tissue into a wide-mouthed glass flask. The translucent pink fluid was full of digestive enzymes from slaughtered pigs. These biological jackhammers broke up the “mortar” between the lung cells, separating millions upon millions of them. Later, he transferred those cells into several flat-sided glass bottles and poured a nutritious solution over them. Hayflick then loaded the bottles on to a tray, and carried them into an incubation room where the temperature was a cosy 36C. He laid the bottles on their sides on a wooden shelf and closed the door carefully behind him. There the cells began to divide. He already had a name for them: WI-38.



The WI-38 cells that Hayflick launched that day were used to make vaccines that have been given to more than 300 million people – half of them preschool children in the US. A copycat group of cells, developed using the method that Hayflick pioneered, has been used to make an additional 6bn doses of various vaccines.


Together these vaccines have protected people the world over from the gamut of viral illnesses: rubella, rabies, chickenpox, measles, polio, hepatitis A, shingles and adenovirus – a respiratory infection that flourishes in situations where people live in close quarters. (Every US military recruit – more than nine million of them since 1971 – is given an adenovirus vaccine made using WI-38 cells.) In the US, a vaccine made in WI-38 cells that is still given to young children has wiped out homegrown rubella. It was developed at the Wistar Institute by Hayflick’s colleague Stanley Plotkin, during a rubella epidemic that swept the country in 1964 and 1965.




The WI-38 cells Hayflick launched that day made vaccines that have been given to more than 300 million people




The WI-38 cells are still in use today partly because Hayflick made such a large initial stock of them: some 800 tiny, wine-bottle–shaped ampoules were frozen in the summer of 1962. When frozen, cells stop dividing, but then gamely begin replicating when they are thawed.Each glass vial that Hayflick froze contained between 1.5m and 2m cells. The cells in those vials had, on average, the capacity to divide about 40 more times. Early on, Hayflick determined that the newly derived cells in just one of his small glass lab bottles, if allowed to replicate until they died, would produce 20m tonnes of cells.In those 800 vials, he had created a supply of cells that for practical purposes was almost infinite.


In addition to their use in vaccine making, the WI-38 cells became the first normal cells available in virtually unlimited quantities to scientists probing the mysteries of cell biology. Because they were easily infected with human viruses, they became important to disease detectives tracking viruses in the 1960s, before more sophisticated technology came along.Biologists still reach for WI-38 cells when they need a normal cell to compare against a cancerous one, or to test the toxicity of new drugs. They are a workhorse of research into ageing, because they so reliably age and die in laboratory conditions. Original ampoules of WI-38 cells, and of polio vaccine made using them, are now part of the collection of the National Museum of American History.


But in the 1960s and 70s, a bitter feud broke out between Hayflick and the US government over who owned the cells.



Hayflick in the lab in the 1960s.


Hayflick in the lab in the 1960s. Photograph: Supplied


As the importance of the WI-38 cells grew,Hayflick was only too happy to promote them. “Human Cells Given Role in Vaccines,” the New York Times proclaimed after the scientist spoke at a vaccine conference in 1966. The article quoted Hayflick explaining that his cells were cheaper, cleaner and safer than the animal cells then used in vaccine manufacture.


As his profile rose, Hayflick ran out of patience with Koprowski. The disconnect between his contributions and his treatment by the Wistar Institute’s director had become too much to bear. Nine years after Koprowski hired him, Hayflick remained stuck as an associate member of the institute, in sharp contrast to many colleagues who had been made full members despite, to his mind, making contributions no greater than his own.


Hayflick began looking around. He applied for a position as a full professor of medical microbiology at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. His application for the job was backed by a recommendation from a senior virologist who regarded his work as “reliable, trustworthy and original”. He was offered the post.


As Hayflick’s departure approached, there was probably only one thing that concerned Koprowski: the fate of the hundreds of ampoules of WI-38 cells that were still stored in liquid nitrogen in the Wistar Institute’s basement, under Hayflick’s watchful eye. Hayflick’s proprietary feelings about the cells were well known – he once described them as “like my children”.


Koprowski had designs on the cells from the beginning. Nancy Pleibel, a lab technician who worked for Hayflick, recalls that more than once Koprowski had turned up in the lab within a day or two of Hayflick leaving on a trip, smiling and asking her for an ampoule of WI-38 cells. Politely but firmly, she refused his requests, explaining that only her boss could hand out WI-38 ampoules. After a while, Koprowski stopped asking.


Minutes from meetings of the Wistar Institute’s board of managers in the early and mid-60s make clear that Koprowski tried repeatedly to cash in on Hayflick’s human diploid cells(defined as cells that carry the normal complement of 46 chromosomes). The institute sought payment not only from Norden, a Missouri company that was interested in using WI-38 to develop a rabies vaccine, but also from Pfizer for the use of Hayflick’s cells to make a measles vaccine, and from Wyeth, another Philadelphia-based drug manufacturer that by 1965 had used the WI-38 cells to make an adenovirus vaccine to protect US army recruits during basic training.


Koprowski’s attempts to turn a profit with the WI-38 cells were far from successful. By 1965, the board of managers had appointed “a special committee of lawyers and scientists to deal with problems” in selling the Hayflick cells to industry. The only backing that the institute landed, according to budget documents from 1965 to 1967, was $ 5,000 in each of those years from Norden.


Today it seems incredible that an institution like the Wistar, full of eminent scientists, was so at sea when it came to profiting from unique and desirable cells produced under its roof. But in that era living things, such as the WI-38 cells, could not be patented. It would take a landmark supreme court decision in 1980 to change that.


However, what could be patented was a method of using the cells to produce a novel vaccine. Koprowski had already applied, back in 1964, for such a patent for another, improved rabies vaccine that he was developing using the WI-38 cells. Soon the Wistar Institute would apply for a patent on a method of making a rubella vaccine with the WI-38s, devised by another of its scientists, Stanley Plotkin.


If and when the rabies and rubella vaccine patents were granted, Koprowski would need accessto at least some of the original ampoules of WI-38 frozen in the Wistar Institute basement.Vaccine companies would want original ampoules full of the youngest cells, which could be expanded into a nearly endless supply.


By the autumn of 1967, Hayflick vaguely suspected that Koprowski intended the WI-38 cells to serve something more thanthe good of mankind. Hayflick believed that his boss hoped to turn any vaccines made with the cells into sources of cash, boosting the Wistar Institute’s income and freeing him from fundraising duties that he detested and considered beneath him.



Transmission electron micrograph of Rubella virions.


Transmission electron micrograph of Rubella virions. Photograph: Science Photo Library

Hayflick’s instincts were right. As 1967 drew to a close, a financial vice was tightening on Koprowski. While the Wistar Institute had remained solvent, it had never been flush with funds, especially after Koprowski blew through $ 271,506 to fund major renovations that were completed in 1959. By the mid-60s, his struggle to find cash not tied to specific grants was becoming desperate. Badly needed repairs to the roof and the air conditioning system were deferred.


In the autumn of 1967, when officials at the NIH’s National Cancer Institute (NCI) learned that Hayflick would be moving to Stanford, they decided to take the production, storage, study and distribution to researchers of human diploid cells out of his hands. The NCI had been paying the Wistar Institute hundreds of thousands of dollars for Hayflick to produce and distribute the cells since 1962, shortly after his paper announcing his human diploid cell strains to the world had sent demand soaring. The agency’s contract with the Wistar Institute had specified that the government would take ownership of the cells when the contract was terminated. Now, NIH officials set 1 January 1968 as the end date. The timing seemed right, and not only because of Hayflick’s impending move. The sense at the NCI was that the demand for the WI-38 cells had been sated. Those scientists who wanted them, it seemed, had them by now, more than five years after Hayflick had first produced them. They were being used widely and had already been cited in scores of papers.


On 18 January 1968, several men travelled to the Wistar Institute to sort out the physical disposition of the WI-38 cells now that the contract had ended. Koprowski summoned Hayflick to meet with them. Also present were senior scientists from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC). This independent, nonprofit organisation was the country’s highest-profile cell bank, and was often where biologists turned when they needed a particular type of cell for an experiment. According to records, the assembled men agreed that all but 20 of the roughly 375 remaining original ampoules of WI-38 cells would be transferred to the ATCC, which would maintain them, deeply frozen, on behalf of the NIH. Hayflick would be permitted to take 10 ampoules with him to Stanford, and the Wistar Institute would also be allowed to keep 10.


The group also decided that any use of the 355 original ampoules being transferred to the ATCC – they were precious because the WI-38 cell populations in them had divided only eight times, and so could be expanded into untold billions of cells for vaccine making – “should be totally arrested”. By this, they meant that there was to be no more thawing of the ampoules, no more planting of these young cells into lab bottles, and no more splitting of those bottles over and over to generate multitudes of cells at higher doubling levels for scientists to use. Scientists could use the older cells that were already in circulation. The remaining 355 original ampoules needed to be kept safely frozen at the ATCC until such time as companies began winning US licences to make WI-38–based vaccines.


Some time during his last months at the Wistar Institute, Hayflick was working in one of the tiny “sterile” rooms that adjoined his lab. Plotkin squeezed through the door and pulled up the only chair. The two chatted for a while, then Plotkin showed Hayflick a document. It was a letter, on Wistar-headed paper, from Koprowski, written to a senior official at Burroughs Wellcome, the British pharmaceutical company. Koprowski was offering to provide to the company ample supplies of WI-38 cells, along with the recipe for making a vaccine with the cells and the virus itself, all in exchange for royalties.




‘To have the vultures descend on what I had struggled to give value to – most people would understand why I was upset’




Hayflick’s suspicions had been confirmed. He was profoundly upset. He had spent the previous decade deriving the cells and opened up a new, important field in the study of cellular ageing. He had derived enough WI-38 cells to serve vaccine makers into the distant future and worked as hard as was humanly possible to win acceptance of the cells for vaccine making. In the process of all of this, he had been ridiculed and been forced to struggle for respect and validation.


This letter signalled that not only was he not valued but that he was also being sidelined in major decision-making – and likely profit-making – connected to the WI-38 cells. As Hayflick said, “to have the vultures descend on what I had struggled so hard to give value to and [for them to] try to take it for their benefit – I think that an average person would understand why I was, to put it mildly, concerned”.


On or around 1 March – when, under the January agreement, the ampoules were to have been moved from the Wistar Institute to the ATCC – a specially outfitted station wagon arrived from Maryland, carrying the NIH project officer, Charles Boone, and John Shannon, the ATCC’s curator of cell lines. Hayflick turned them away, saying he wasn’t ready to hand over the cells because he had not prepared an inventory of them.


Not long after this, Hayflick, unobserved, visited the Wistar Institute’s basement. There he packed every single one of the remaining original WI-38 ampoules – 375 frozen vials: the largest stock of young WI-38 cells on earth – into one or more portable liquid-nitrogen refrigerators and departed the premises. He left nothing behind – not even the 10 ampoules that Koprowski’s institute had been promised in the January agreement.



Hilary Koprowski at work in his lab.


Hilary Koprowski at work in his lab. Photograph: Yale Joel/The Life Picture Collection/Getty Images

Hayflick stored the frozen cells temporarily with a friend, a vaccinologist at the nearby Wyeth Laboratories who, from time to time, topped up the liquid nitrogen that kept the cells frozen. Hayflick says that he took the ampoules with the intention of keeping them only until the ownership of the cells could be properly sorted out. He believed that there were several potential stakeholders who might reasonably claim ownership: himself and his early collaborator at the Wistar Institute, the chromosome expert Paul Moorhead; the “estate” of the WI-38 foetus, by which he meant the WI-38 foetus’s parents; the Wistar Institute; and, just possibly, the NIH. But he was not going to be so naive as to leave the cells in the NIH’s possession while these matters were decided. If he did that, he was sure that he would never see them again.


In mid-1968, Hayflick left for his new job in California. Moving a family of seven 2,900 miles was no small undertaking. The Hayflicks split the travel. Ruth flew out to the San Francisco Bay Area with their two youngest daughters. Hayflick drove the three older children cross-country in their dark green Buick sedan. They drove west through Pittsburgh, stopped to see drag races in Joplin, Missouri, and then headed on to Arizona, where they gazed at the world’s best-preserved meteor crater and marvelled at the Grand Canyon. All along the way, some extra cargo travelled with them. Carefully strapped on the backseat beside his children was a liquid-nitrogen refrigerator stuffed with ampoules of WI-38.



Hayflick’s flight with the cells would make him the target of a career-derailing investigation by the National Institutes of Health. Hayflick counter-sued – eventually, in 1981, settling with the government. He was allowed to keep six original ampoules of the cells, along with $ 90,000 that he had earned by charging researchers and companies for them after he left the Wistar Institute. A letter from supporters published in the journal Science, described the “happy outcome of Dr Hayflick’s courageous, sometimes lonely, emotionally damaging and professionally destructive ordeal”.


But just as the tug-of-war over ownership of the WI-38 cells peaked, profound changes occurred in attitudes and laws governing who could make money from biological inventions. In the space of a few years, biologists went from being expected to work only for their salaries and the greater good to being encouraged by universities and the government to commercialise their innovations for the benefit of the institutions, the US economy – and themselves.


Although the WI-38 cellswere launched long before these changes took place– and 18 years before the supreme court decreed that a living entity, such as a WI-38 cell, could be patenteda lot of money has been made from them. The drug company Merck, in particular, has made billions of dollars by using the WI-38 cells to make the rubella vaccine given to more than seven million American children each year. The Wistar Institute too enjoyed a handsome royalty stream from vaccines made by its scientists using the cells – including a much-improved rabies vaccine that replaced sometimes dangerous injections. Cell banks today charge several hundred dollars for a tiny vial of the cells.


During the long battle for ownership of the WI-38 cells, Koprowski sent a Wistar scientist across the country to collect them from Hayflick’s Stanford lab. But Hayflick refused to part with them. A second emissary was more successful, returning with the 10 ampoules originally allocated to the institute. But later, while the NIH was still asserting its title to WI-38, Koprowski seems to have given up. Perhaps this was because Hayflick was now so far away. Maybe it was because, despite his propensity for it, Koprowski actually disliked direct conflict. Possibly, it was because several companies already appeared to have adequate supplies of the youngest WI-38 ampoules. On the other hand, though, it might have been because Koprowski had finally realised just how persistent, obdurate and dedicated Hayflick could be.


This is an adapted extract from The Vaccine Race by Meredith Wadman, published by Doubleday on 9 February in the UK and in the US by Viking.


Follow the Long Read on Twitter at @gdnlongread, or sign up to the long read weekly email



Germ warfare: the battle for the key to modern vaccines

12 Kasım 2015 Perşembe

Germ vs Terrain Concept – Which Do We Adopt To Be Healthier?

In the Western world, we are desperately obsessed with killing issues off that we feel can threaten our livelihood. Whether it is germs, terrorists, or the up coming door neighbour, we seek to remove something that does not agree with us rather than trying to sustain a healthy stability amongst preferred and undesirable circumstances.


When it comes to our wellness, the Western world has largely adopted the germ theory, meaning we require to recognize and destroy something we deem as a foreign invader as it is straight responsible for triggering ailment. However, there is another concept referred to as the terrain theory, which believes that it is not the “germ” that determines disease, but rather, the state of our internal wellness and its capability to sustain homeostasis in the encounter of “unfriendly” organisms.


Let’s appear into every theory a bit more to establish which theory we ought to adopt when trying to be healthful.


Germ Concept


The germ – or microbial – concept of illness was popularized by Louis Pasteur (1822 – 1895), the inventor of pasteurization. This theory states that there are fixed, external germs which invade the body and are the direct cause of a assortment of separate, definable illnesses. If you really want to get effectively, you need to kill whatever germ made you sick, and do no matter what attainable to make “sure” that you in no way let a microbe to enter your entire body in the 1st place.


With this theory comes Western medication and its resources and technology that treats the symptoms of an unfriendly microbe rooting itself in the internal setting, by way of factors this kind of as drugs, surgical procedure, radiation, and chemotherapy. Taking it a stage more, in order to consider and stay away from an infection in the very first place, numerous vaccines have been launched to try to maintain the condition from invading our entire body in the very first area.


The germ theory was partly shaped around Pasteur’s thought that the human physique is sterile, which means it is a blank slate devoid of any germs. With this notion in thoughts we could conclude that we have to combat germs all the time in every way attainable, and that preventative measures by way of issues like nutrition are fundamentally useless.


So, if you are to closely adhere to the germ theory, you need to be vigilant towards various types of infections by way of prevention (mainly vaccinations), and destruction (antibiotics, surgical procedure, radiation, chemotherapy) of any external microbe that ever attempts or succeeds to get within our body.


Anything else is fundamentally fruitless against illness prevention.


Terrain Concept


The terrain theory was initiated by Claude Bernard (1813 – 1878), and later on built upon by Antoine Bechamp (1816-1908). He believed that the “terrain” or “internal environment” determined our state of overall health. When the physique is working in homeostasis, and immunity and detoxification is operating properly, he claimed there was a healthier terrain which could take care of a variety of pathogenic microorganisms that inevitably are thrown its way.


In essence, he believed the high quality of the terrain and the aspects it faced established an individual’s susceptibility to illness.


Bernard, Bechamp, and their successors, believed that illness occurs to a massive extent as a function of biology and as a end result of alterations that get place when metabolic processes grow to be imbalanced. Germs then become signs that stimulate the occurrence of a lot more signs and symptoms, which eventually culminate into disease. A weak terrain is naturally a lot more vulnerable to external threats, so it needs to be built up by means of nutrition, detoxification, and by keeping a proper pH or acid/alkaline balance.


For this and other factors Bechamp argued vehemently against vaccines, asserting that “The most significant issues could be provoked by the injection of residing organisms into the blood.” Untold numbers of researchers have agreed with him.


So, if you are to closely stick to the terrain theory, you may possibly make yourself mindful of different external microbes that could be hazardous to our well being and the gentle, non-toxic removal of them, but your target is on constructing and sustaining the integrity of your inner terrain so that any external microbe that you may possibly ingest does not morph into anything at all with serious implications to your overall health.


This indicates nutrition, detoxification, and mindset are essential aspects you take into account important in disease prevention and elimination.


Pasteur Recants On His Deathbed


One of the most intriguing twists in this battle for “disease prevention supremacy” largely headlined by Pasteur and Bernard, is that Pasteur recanted on his deathbed above his whole daily life perform, stating that “the microbe is absolutely nothing the milieu is almost everything.” An additional way of stating these phrases is that it is not the germ that leads to disease, but the terrain in which the germ is identified.


An additional gentleman, Rudolf Virchow, father of the germ theory, stated in his later years, “If I could dwell my daily life more than again, I would dedicate it to proving that germs look for their normal habitat–diseased tissues–rather than causing illness.”


So when you are thinking about your health prepare, strongly think about the final results we are seeing in a germ theory dominated wellness care system. Then determine regardless of whether you want to get that road, or follow individuals who are healthy that predominantly stick to the terrain theory.


This writer staunchly believes in the terrain concept and has removed many condition labels and signs from his lifestyle by totally following this theory and admonishing the notion of the germ theory. You can see the kind of benefits he generated by re-establishing his terrain, right here.


If you are also a firm believer that well being of your terrain largely determines your overall wellness, and want to know how to master that surroundings so you can not only survive but THRIVE, verify into this on the internet holistic overall health plan.


Sources for this post include:


http://www.mountainculinaire.com/germ-vs-terrain-theory/
http://www.laleva.org/eng/2004/05/louis_pasteur_vs_antoine_bchamp_and_the_germ_theory_of_ailment_causation_one.html
https://timelessremedies.wordpress.com/2007/ten/29/biological-terrain-vs-the-germ-concept/


About the author:


Derek Henry took a deadly overall health challenge that traditional medication couldn’t solve and self-directed a 1-in-a-million wellness journey that located him happier and more healthy than he had been in his whole daily life. As a consequence of this rewarding journey, he designed Healing the Body and grew to become a effectively revered holistic well being coach who now spends his time creating, coaching, and educating 1000′s of individuals each month who want to take pleasure in comparable outcomes.


His Wellness Transformation E-Guide and THRIVE On the internet Well being Program are two essential resources for any individual who wishes to have the intelligence and solutions to grow to be genuinely properly.



Germ vs Terrain Concept – Which Do We Adopt To Be Healthier?

2 Temmuz 2014 Çarşamba

The Mexican "germ invasion" is just the right"s latest anti-immigration myth | Laura Murphy

Late last week, prior to President Obama gave up on pressuring Congress on extensive immigration reform in favor of his acquainted executive actions, media retailers began pressing a familiar non-information item.


The regional CBS station in Dallas/Fort Really worth reported that “four or five [US Border Patrol] agents have examined positive” for illnesses such as chicken pox or tuberculosis, ostensibly contracted at their border posts. With in excess of 18,500 agents stationed along the Mexican border, the headline probably ought to have been some thing like “Border Patrol Agents Unusually Healthful Between Americans”. Matt Drudge favored, as normal, a far more pernicious threat: BORDER PATROL AGENTS Check Constructive FOR Disease CARRIED BY IMMIGRANTS.


Channel eleven in Dallas also reported that one of the young children among the 52,000 who have crossed US borders in the last handful of months has been diagnosed with H1N1 virus (also acknowledged as “swine flu”). Congressman Henry Cuellar blamed the possible issue on “some of these countries the place they don’t have fantastic health care methods.” Perhaps he was speaking about the United States: Now that H1N1 is the predominant flu strain in the US and Canada, the Centers for Illness Manage reviews that two,008 of the two,815 reported instances of the flu in the US this season have been recognized as H1N1. That indicates that if you had the flu in the US in the past 9 months, it is much more than 70% likely that you have been contaminated with the swine flu, just like the sick little one trapped in Texas.


A little informed comparison can be beneficial: a examine of mortality among US school teachers suggests that they contract autoimmune illnesses at a fee disproportionate with the common population. Also: the subway is a significant conduit for the spread of influenza, including swine flu.


Thankfully, we haven’t begun a Typhoid Mary-style campaign against each and every American who employed public transportation, taught a middle-college class and/or sneezed this 12 months. But the myth of diseased hordes of immigrants has a long background in the American imagination, and now it is inflaming anti-immigration sentiment at a time when we need to tackle the genuine humanitarian requirements of the men and women who cross our borders in search of chance.


Even though President Obama said on Monday that he is doing work to “handle the urgent humanitarian challenge on the border”, the conservative radio host Bryan Fischer suggests that the genuine “humanitarian disaster” is the risk the young children pose to US citizens’ health. (He also thinks “children are now dying at the border due to the fact of Obama”.) Dr Marc Siegel preemptively declared on Fox News that the immigrant children had been “a big overall health crisis” – despite the reality that the US Department of Wellness and Human Services vaccinates and screens every recovered kid.


The consequence of this false reporting is widespread public anxiousness that immigrant populations pose a risk to the well being and safety of US citizens. And the normal “not in my neighborhood” cries have gone up on social media, insisting that the girls and kids who have just lately migrated in huge waves need to not be allowed a protected area to dwell in the United States while their situations get sorted out.


The howls are specifically egregious if it means the latest migrants to America reside anyplace close to the apparently complete-blooded Americans who do not recall their very own immigrant heritages or their ancestors who had been wrongfully accused of contaminating the nation in the 19th and early 20th centuries.


Let’s place this summer’s rhetoric into viewpoint: 1918 noticed a worldwide flu pandemic in the course of which at least 20m men and women died globally and as many as 550,000 died in the US alone. At times known as Spanish influenza simply because the first circumstances have been diagnosed in Spain, tiny was identified about who carried the flu and in which it originated. But the infection knew no age, class, race or ethnic bounds – folks all above the globe succumbed to a simple but deadly flu.


Nonetheless, US reporting on the Spanish flu and other diseases that arose at that time suggested erroneously that a surge in immigration caused the enhanced infections. In Denver, the Ku Klux Klan promoted anti-Italian sentiment by suggesting that the recent immigrants from Europe were responsible for the flu. Germans have been accused of employing the flu as germ warfare. Irish immigrants have been charged with spreading cholera. Tuberculosis was dubbed the “tailor’s disease” since men and women connected it with Jewish immigrants. Italians had been blamed for polio, too, despite the fact that they had been least most likely to contract it.


The terror of immigration-born epidemics was largely imagined, of course, but it fueled extremely real anti-immigrant fears and resulted in discrimination and oppression. These when-racialized groups are now folded into “whiteness” such that their histories of immigration have largely been erased from nationwide memory. Without considerable immigration reform, I concern the stigma connected to immigrants on the Mexican border could not fade so fast.



The Mexican "germ invasion" is just the right"s latest anti-immigration myth | Laura Murphy

20 Nisan 2014 Pazar

"Microbe Hunters" With A Present day Sensibility, "The Remedy" Examines Germ Theory"s Scientific Origin And Social Diffusion

I can trace my early profession interests along a vector of science literature that began in elementary school, with Paul de Kruif’s 1926 traditional, Microbe Hunters, continued with Berton Roueche’s great New Yorker “Medical Detective” stories in junior higher, and was followed by Horace Freeland Judson’s Eighth Day of Creation, an inspirational history of molecular biology’s formative years,  in higher school.  When I was touring schools and came across the centrifuge used in the popular Meselson-Stahl experiment carried out to demonstrate the semiconservative replication of DNA, I was offered.


In many ways, the de Kruif stories, written as profiles in heroic science, have aged the least effectively the hagiography retains a certain charm, to be certain, but loses its immediacy and sense of resonance.  I’ve prolonged wished Microbe Hunters could be updated in a way that more fully contextualizes the researchers’ work and achievements – not to tear down these heroes, but to humanize them, representing their accomplishments – and their failures – with greater nuance, but related empathy, even though placing the science in a broader and much more full social context.


In reading through Thomas Goetz’s The Treatment this weekend, I felt that my wish was lastly granted.


Goetz may be ideal acknowledged for a preceding position, Executive Editor of Wired.  Right now, he’s co-founder (with Matt Mohebbi, of Google Flu Trends fame) of the health analytics startup Iodine, and Entrepreneur-in-Residence at the Robert Wood Johnson Basis, and has an abiding, possibly unavoidable curiosity in wellness and medicine.  His late father was a prominent academic diabetologist, his mother worked as nurse for decades, a sister is a training surgeon, and one more sister was tragically killed in Uganda in 1998 while functioning to advance public well being with the Minnesota International Health Volunteers.  He has carried out them all proud with this work.


Goetz’s easy familiarity with medicine suffuses the pages of The Remedy, a thoughtful, patient, in the long run fascinating account of the struggle of 19th century science, and society, to come to grips with the germ concept of illness, and produce new technologies to consider on 1 of humanity’s oldest scourges, tuberculosis.


Goetz focuses on two protagonists in particular, beginning with the German Robert Koch, whose ambition and careful methodology propelled him from obscurity to fame, culminating in the identification of the causative agent of tuberculosis, the elusive Mycobacterium tuberculosis.  We are launched to Koch’s struggles: the righteous,  which includes his disputes with distinguished skeptic Rudolf Virchow, who believed germs had been at greatest the consequence, not result in of ailment the petty — most notably his bitter, ongoing battle with Louis Pasteur for recognition and acclaim and the misguided – such as his mistaken belief that he had recognized a remedy for tuberculosis.  Had he only utilized the rigorous precepts for evidence that he meticulously created, and that had guided his work for years, the tragic error, and ensuing fall from grace, it looks, could easily have been avoided.


Who was arguably the very first person to propose the great Robert Koch may well have been mistaken?  An ambitious British doctor making an attempt to gain traction as a writer, and who had traveled to a scientific demonstration in Berlin expecting to be dazzled by Koch, nevertheless returned disappointed though with a fascinating story to share.


Nevertheless it wasn’t his critique of Koch that catapulted this writer to fame rather, it was the scientific methodology of his character Sherlock Holmes that sooner or later introduced the globe to Arthur Conan Doyle.


However Conan Doyle at some point very medication to concentrate on writing, “Conan Doyle had gotten a great deal out of medicine,” Goetz writes:



“An training, a sense of stature and accomplishment, and most of all, a globe view.  His was by now a thoroughly scientific mind, regardless of whether or not he nevertheless chose to participate in that science.  Healthcare science informed how he considered it influenced how he wrote and really clearly, it was inseparable from what he wrote.”



Conan Doyle’s Holmes – a lot like Koch at his best– was, Goetz observes, “precise, methodical, and keenly perceptive.  He ably appropriates the tactics of the bacteriologist to discern what seems otherwise invisible.”


This method appealed to Conan Doyle’s audience since, as Goetz writes,



“science was longer seen as some radical challenge to European culture instead, it seemed in several approaches to define the culture.  This was real in Germany and France and specifically in Britain, the place science seemed to touch anything in the Victorian spirit.”



Knowing how germ theory manufactured this leap, and evolved from revolutionary science to cultural expectation is Goetz’s preoccupying query – or as he frames it much more generally, “how does a scientific revolution construct towards social modify?”  He continues,



“This is probably the central query of the previous 150 many years, a period when science has, time and once again, transcended a eureka moment in the laboratory to compel a broader cultural shift.  This trajectory lies behind every little thing from nuclear energy to plastics to the Internet.  But as important as this trajectory is for the fabric of our day-to-day lives, the method too usually slips by without having our noting it, or even our know how, exactly, the progress truly takes place.”



Moving from science to culture, Goetz writes, demands two related but distinct actions, characterized by distinct processes and associated with various burdens of evidence.  The initial phase is scientific – achieving the sort of paradigm shift Kuhn describes (and that Jim Manzi nicely reviews in Uncontrolled) by providing compelling information that meet established specifications of evidence – and waiting for holdouts to die off.


The 2nd step – originally conceptualized, Goetz says, by Freeman Dyson – is the “skills and inventions” (to use Dyson’s terms) that come from new scientific concepts.  In this see, as Goetz puts it, “the revolution lives in the sector, not the thought.”  It’s the technology, the industry, the useful outcomes of science that we see around us that eventually permits the revolution to move from science to culture.


As a result, while Koch might have designed the crucial ideas for defining a causative agents – Koch’s postulates continue to be taught in medical school these days – the cultural adoption of this mindset necessary not just concrete examples of good results (this kind of as Pasteur’s renowned demonstration of an anthrax vaccine at Pouilly-le-Fort, which culminated, according to Goetz, with Pasteur raising his arms in triumph and crying “Here is it! Oh ye of small faith!”), but also characters such as Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes, an engaging representation of the scientific procedure Pasteur and Koch refined, preached, and quite frequently, practiced.



"Microbe Hunters" With A Present day Sensibility, "The Remedy" Examines Germ Theory"s Scientific Origin And Social Diffusion

26 Şubat 2014 Çarşamba

Cleaning Touchscreen Products: Disgusting Germ Gathering Magnets

Cleansing Touchscreen Gadgets


If you knew what was lurking on your cellphone screen proper now, you would not want to choose it up sporting gloves let alone hold it towards your encounter or touch the screen!  Believe of how typically we share images with friends and they touch your display, you get it to the fitness center, set it down in locations germs are lurking and by no means feel twice about it.  The bacteria living on your screen appropriate now can trigger flu, colds, pinkeye, indigestion and significantly worse in accordance to physicians interviewed lately by the Wall Street Journal. 


A lab tested eight randomly selected phones from a Chicago workplace and all phones showed abnormally high numbers of coliforms, a bacteria that signifies fecal contamination. Of the eight phones examined, there had been amongst about 2,700 and 4,200 units of coliform bacteria. In consuming water, the restrict is significantly less than one unit per 100 ml of water.


So we just need to have to clean our phones every day, correct.  Effectively that is the place the cleaning touchscreen units challenge begins.  You cannot just throw it in the dishwasher or pour a bottle of Clorox over it since most cleaners and disinfectants can harm your phone’s screen or situation.


Methods to Cleansing Touchscreen Devices:


one. Wash your hands typically or use a hand sanitizer before touching your display. I love YL Thieves all normal spray/sanitizer simply because it kills almost everything and smells fantastic.


two. Really do not hand your telephone to your runny nosed youngster to occupy them except if they have washed their hands or used sanitizer.


three. Do not share your mobile phone with close friends and co-employees to “collect their germs” on your gadget unless, you guessed it, they use hand sanitizer.


four. By no means apply water or cleaner directly to the phone. Use a dampened soft cloth (microfiber operates best). Do not soak the cloth so that it is dripping or simply wring it out to remove excess moisture ahead of employing circular, gentle motions to clean.  Do not use something abrasive or use excessive force.


five. Use an accepted cleansing substance on your mobile phone to clean it. Keep in mind iPhone and iPod Touch screens are manufactured with an oleophobic coating that repels oil. These screens should be handled with care to maintain them working effectively and to steer clear of damaging your display.  Never use anything containing alcohol or other chemical compounds on your touchscreen.


I located this handy kit on Amazon and keep it in my purse.  Screen Cleaner 2goTM Organic Digital Cleansing Kit Excellent for Iphone, Droid, Ipad, and Other Products


Healthy Blessings,


Sandy


My Weblog: Normal Treatments for Each day


If you were totally disgusted by Cleansing Touchscreen Products and would like to share it with your friends, please do so.  But not on YOUR cellphone!



Cleaning Touchscreen Products: Disgusting Germ Gathering Magnets

14 Ocak 2014 Salı

The Rewards of Including Wheat Germ to Your Diet regime

Wheat germ is the wheat plant’s embryo, which indicates it is also its most nutritious portion, offering all the aspects necessary for the new plant to develop. The other two parts of the kernel are the fibrous outer shell called bran and the starchy middle layer, endosperm. The latter is the only component that is utilized in the manufacturing of white flour. The germ is removed altogether, because the nutritious oils it contains quickly turn rancid, stopping foods producers from storing the solution for lengthy periods of time.


The Causes Wheat Germ is Great for You


It is Loaded with Nutrients


Even though it comprises only three% of the kernel, wheat germ is packed with nutrition. Just two tablespoons of raw germ offer four grams of protein, nine grams or carbs and 1.5 grams of unsaturated fat. You can get 60% of your day-to-day fiber necessity from 115 grams of wheat germ. It is loaded with B nutritional vitamins, healthful fatty acids, and minerals like iron, calcium, zinc and magnesium. It is 1 of the ideal folic acid sources you can locate, which can be notably important for girls who are both pregnant or are preparing to have young children. Its minimal glycemic index implies that it has a mild result on blood sugar amounts and is a appropriate foods for diabetics.


Check out this video for a a lot more comprehensive breakdown of the germ’s dietary positive aspects.


It Reduces Cholesterol


The phytosterols in the wheat germ are steroid compounds that assist decrease all round cholesterol levels as properly as LDL, also acknowledged as bad cholesterol. In a review published in 1992 by the National Institute of Health and Healthcare Study in Marseille, France, participants consuming a quarter cup of raw wheat germ daily for 14 weeks showed a 15.4% drop in LDL cholesterol.


It Fights Cancer and Arthritis


A study published by the British Journal of Cancer showed that fermented wheat germ lowers the incidence of colon cancer spreading, minimizes its recurrence and increases survival amongst individuals. A recurrence of melanoma in individuals undergoing chemotherapy has also been proven to lessen in other studies. The research published in the 2006 journal Clinical Experiments in Rheumatology showed that patients with rheumatoid arthritis noticed the reduction in morning stiffness after taking fermented wheat germ for six to 12 months, and half of the sufferers have been ready to reduce the volume of steroids they have been taking.


This condition fighting type of wheat germ is fermented with the aid of baker’s yeast, which guarantees substantial concentration of naturally energetic compounds acknowledged as benzoquinones.


How to Consume Wheat Germ


The germ is made up of most of its nutrition in the raw kind, so it is very best if you can stay away from cooking it. Adding it to your morning cereal or yogurt is a wonderful location to start. It also helps make a fantastic ingredient for protein shakes – just add it before blending factors up. You can cook with it as nicely, substituting some of the flour in your recipes for wheat germ, including it to casseroles and pancakes, and utilizing it in spot of bread crumbs for frying. Make sure to refrigerate your wheat germ (get wheat germ delivered to your door – click this Amazon affiliate hyperlink to purchase some now) right after opening and maintain it in an airtight container to preserve the freshness.


When to Steer clear of It


Sufferers with Celiac Disease or other gluten sensitivities must steer clear of wheat germ, just as they would any other component of wheat.


Sources for this post consist of:



The Rewards of Including Wheat Germ to Your Diet regime