BilZ0r said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:They are both equally toxic. What you need is echinacea or better
still, if you restore your immune system.
Dare I ask, from your immunology understanding, how does any herb/drug
"restore" your immune system. There ain't no such thing.
Well there are drugs which stimulate CD4,8 cell counts...
Well see, no. They don't. The only compounds stimulate a class of immune
cells are all VERY toxic, such as pokeweed. Counts also are potentially
misrepresentative of how the immune system is actually functioning.
---
The use of the word restore, and the implications of how it was said,
implies that the immune system was responding incorrectly, and it needs
some insight from a plant to actually know how to work properly.
This is garbage. There is no drug that changes or resets the immune
system response into the "correct one", whatever that would mean.
Classic examples of asthma and glucocorticoids do not count because the
GC's do not change the fact that the person has asthma. It does not
remove the asthma. Another example of the same line is antirejection
drugs for transplants. They again stop the immune response (particularly
T cells), but without the drug, your immune system goes straight back
into rejection. We are merely preventing the immune system from reacting
the way it WANTS to act.
Glucosamine and arthritis isn't relevant because the glucosamine is
merely adding onto the "cushioning" of the joints, not changing the
immune response.
Maybe the only example could be the drugs used to stop transplantation
rejection. They are strong antagonists of immune responses, particularly
T cell responses, and so it modifies the immune response to something we
"want" to occur. But like in asthma, this is external manipulation,
without the drug the immune system would go straight back into rejection
mode.
But going back to drugs that increase CD4 counts, ie, I'm assuming
you're talking about antiretroviral drugs. These drugs reduce the viral
levels, allowing the average lifespan of CD4 T cells to increase. This
means that the immune system is more likely to generate a proper
response to an antigen/infection/challenge.
However, drug or not, the immune system WOULD respond the same way to
the antigen. It is only because AIDS impairs the response so
dramatically that the immune system is "restored" to some level of
competant functioning. In reality the drugs do nothing but allow the
immune system to have a chance at responding. There is no miraculous
change in the method of attacking HIV, or any other illness because the
drugs are there. The CD4 T cells, nor any other themselves are not
changed whatsoever.
It is an external effect you are seeing, not a change/replacement of the
nature of the immune response.
We're talking about changing the immune system from getting "sick from
infections" to "never getting infected". Or something. I never quite
worked that one out.