Re: immune reaction to peptides ( was Further data points on oatmeal weirdness)

[Guest guest]

On 8/25/05, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> >[quoting Heidi]

> >So maybe if you ONLY got A1 protein you'd be ok, but if your

> >system has decided A2 is really bad it might dislike A1 by

> >association.

> [suze]

> It doesn't seem to work this way in regards to the reaction to milk

> proteins

> by autistic and schizophrenic folks though. From what I've read, the

> problem

> with A1 cow's milk is that histidine is in position 67, (due to a genetic

> mutation) and because of this (although I don't know the mechanism) the

> opioid peptide, Beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM7), which is a 7 aa peptide with

> proline in key positions, gets released. For folks like many autistic kids

> and schizophrenics, who don't have adequate DPP IV enzymes which hydrolize

> BCM7, the BCM7 peptide, gets into the bloodstream and thus into the brain

> where it exerts its opioid effects.

But those are opioid effects. Is that not entirely separate from the

immune response?

> In A2 cows milk *proline* is in position 67, which does NOT break down to

> BCM7. So it supposedly shouldn't have the opioid effects of A1 milk. As far

> as I can tell, all species have different milk proteins so no other species

> would have the same AA sequence as in A1 cow's milk, so perhaps no other

> milk would produce opioid peptides such as this mutant protein does. This

> is just my personal speculation, because I don't know if this has been studied

> yet. I'm looking into it and will report back what I find. But it seems the

> key here with the opioid issue, is histidine in position 67, which

> apparently is unique to A1 cow's milk.

But even if other proteins can't break down to opioids, that doesn't

mean your body can't form an immune reaction to them. Your body can

form an immune reaction to almost anything, or, maybe, anything.

> I don't know however, if the IgA reactions to casein that Enterolabs tests

> for, for instance, is to BCM7, or to some other part of cow casein, whether

> A1, A2 or some other type of casein. Although I'd guess it's A1 based on

> what I've learned thus far.

Right, but it would seem quite possible that you'd form a reaction to

a similar protein if consuming it within the span of an increased

immune response to a particular protein.

> >I suspect (no proof at all) that this might be

> >one reason why folks who ate rye and barley mainly didn't

> >end up with major problems, but once they started eating

> >wheat, rye and barley started being problematic also.

>

> Why DO GS folks react to rye and barley? Are the peptides hordein and

> (what's the other one?) similar in structure to gliadin? So, it's a case of

> mistaken identitiy again?

Isn't it possible-- or even probable-- that it is a case of mistaken

identity in the first place? All of the HLA-DQ genes are very similar

to HLA-DQ2 and HLA-DQ8, yet most of them to bind to gluten very well.

It would seem that their original purpose was for something else.

Chris

--

Want the other side of the cholesterol story?

Find out what your doctor isn't telling you:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Suze Fisher wrote:

> Yes, that seems to be the case with candida and gliadin. I'm not sure if

> " association " is the most accurate term though, it seems like the

> antibodies

> to one protein - gliadin for instance - *mistake* a candida protein for

> gliadin. Not because candida is always around when gliadin is ingested

> (association) but because they look so similar. Maybe it's like mistaking

> one fraternal twin for another?

I've heard both. One thing that keeps getting alluded to is

that if one protein happens to be around when there

is some damage, that protein gets " implicated " . The docs

use this to treat warts: if the immune system doesn't

recognize the rather benign wart virus, they drop some irritating substance

on the wart. The immune system sees the irritation, looks

around for a culprit, sees the wart virus, then learns to attack

that virus. It's an outcome of the system your body uses to

recognize a new virus: the virus gets ignored til it starts causing

damage, then when it seems to be a damaging virus, the immune

system learns to attack it.

Similarly, if baker's yeast is around when you eat gluten (which

it usually is, in bread), and the gluten is irritating the gut,

the immune system might decide baker's yeast must be a bad thing

too. So goes the theory anyway. (obviously it could also be

that yeast looks a lot like candida too ...). But the " guilt by

association " is one of those basic assumptions in immunology, it

seems. " Guilt by similarity " obviously occurs too. The immune

system doesn't recognize the civil rights of proteins: shoot first,

ask questions later.

> It doesn't seem to work this way in regards to the reaction to milk

> proteins

> by autistic and schizophrenic folks though. From what I've read, the

> problem

> with A1 cow's milk is that histidine is in position 67, (due to a genetic

> mutation) and because of this (although I don't know the mechanism) the

> opioid peptide, Beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM7), which is a 7 aa peptide with

> proline in key positions, gets released. For folks like many autistic kids

> and schizophrenics, who don't have adequate DPP IV enzymes which hydrolize

> BCM7, the BCM7 peptide, gets into the bloodstream and thus into the brain

> where it exerts its opioid effects.

I'm not sure that autism and schizophrenia are primarily IgA reactions

though?

You don't need an allergic reaction to have an opioid reaction or to

have the casein not be digested properly. (though

personally I think the " leaky gut " that allows the opioids OUT might

be IgA triggered ... the trigger may well not be the milk though).

>

> I don't know however, if the IgA reactions to casein that Enterolabs tests

> for, for instance, is to BCM7, or to some other part of cow casein,

> whether

> A1, A2 or some other type of casein. Although I'd guess it's A1 based on

> what I've learned thus far.

Good question. The IgA reaction to casein does seem far different

in " real life " than the gluten one.

> Why DO GS folks react to rye and barley? Are the peptides hordein and

> (what's the other one?) similar in structure to gliadin? So, it's a

> case of

> mistaken identitiy again?

The hordein and (other one: I forget it too) have a similar peptide. But

since they

still aren't convinced which peptide in wheat is really the issue they

obviously

don't know for sure, and in testing gliadin there are actually several

peptide

strings that cause reactions, not just the 33-mer one (though the other

peptide

strings are more digestible I guess). So yeah, it's " guilt by similarity " .

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

On 8/25/05, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> >But those are opioid effects. Is that not entirely separate from the

> >immune response?

> Yes those are opioid effects which is why I specifically said so, so as not

> to confuse them with the immune reaction Heidi is talking about. Perhaps I

> should've chose a more appropriate subject line.

> As to whether it's separate from teh immune reaction, I don't know. At

> first, I thought that BCM 7 was not the same peptide involved in an IgA

> reaction to casein, but now I'm not so sure. I haven't seen anything yet to

> indicate that it's not the same peptide that is problematic for Celiacs,

> although I think Heidi has mentioned something about a 33 AA chain being

> the

> reactive one? I'm not sure if these are tied together in any way or not.

> Generally, from what I understand, some folks who have neurologial

> reactions

> to gluteomorphin and caseomorphin don't have any sort of gut damage, and

> vice versa. And some have both, like Heidi, I think. There seems to be a

> spectrum of reactions to these peptides and they could well be reactions to

> different portions of it, I just really don't know. Maybe Heidi does?

This is interesting, but seems besides the point. If it was the

(inherently, apparently?) IgA reactions that were the only concern,

then it wouldn't be very important to avoid the IgA allergens with any

immediacy, because whether you eat them or not doesn't make any

permanent effects on your reaction to them. But the other Ig's that

are a response to eating them during gut damage could produce

permanent or semi-permanent effects that could possibly have been

avoided, no? This is why it seems important to me to avoid anything

that is a potential allergen until one has completed the bulk of

healing.

> >But even if other proteins can't break down to opioids, that doesn't

> >mean your body can't form an immune reaction to them.

>

> I agree which is why I didn't suggest otherwise.

No, you didn't, but you said something about being primarily concerned

with IgA reactions, which I find confusing.

Chris

--

Want the other side of the cholesterol story?

Find out what your doctor isn't telling you:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com