Beneficial Viruses?

Session Date: August 23rd 2014

(Odyssey) If different people catch the same virus, does that virus have the possibility of being beneficial or detrimental depending on the person's FRV?

A: Yes.

This is another article pertaining to one of a few viruses that could be considered 'beneficial'.

Friendly Viruses Protect Us Against Bacteria

Bacteria can be friends and foes—causing infection and disease, but also helping us slim down and even combating acne. Now, a new study reveals that viruses have a dual nature as well. For the first time, researchers have shown that they can help our bodies fight off invading microbes.

"This is a very important story," says Marilyn Roossinck, a viral ecologist at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, who was not involved in the work. "We don't have all that many examples of beneficial viruses."

One of our most important lines of defense against bacterial invaders is mucus. The slimy substance coats the inside of the mouth, nose, eyelids, and digestive tract, to name just a few places, creating a barrier to the outside world.

"Mucus is actually a really cool and complex substance," says Jeremy Barr, a microbiologist at San Diego State University in California and lead author of the new study. Its gel-like consistency is thanks to mucins, large, bottle brush-shaped molecules made of a protein backbone surrounded by strings of sugars. In between the mucins is a soup of nutrients and chemicals adapted to keep germs close, but not too close. Microbes such as bacteria live near the surface of the layer, whereas the mucus at the bottom, near the cells that produced it, is almost sterile.

Mucus is also home to phages, viruses that infect and kill bacteria. They can be found wherever bacteria reside, but Barr and his colleagues noticed that there were even more phages in mucus than in mucus-free areas just millimeters away. The saliva surrounding human gums, for example, had about five phages to every bacterial cell, while the ratio at the mucosal surface of the gum itself was closer to 40 to 1. "That spurred the question," Barr says. "What are these phages doing? Are they protecting the host?"

To find out, Barr and his colleagues grew human lung tissue in the lab. Lungs are one of the body surfaces that is protected by mucus, but the researchers also had a version of the lung cells where the ability to make mucus had been knocked out. When incubated overnight with the bacterium Escherichia coli, about half the cells in each culture died; the mucus made no difference to their survival. But when the researchers added a phage that targets E. coli to the cultures, survival rates skyrocketed for the mucus-producing cells. This disparity shows that phages can kill harmful bacteria, Barr says, but it's not clear whether they help or hurt beneficial bacteria; that may depend on which types of phages are present.

In a related series of experiments, the team found that the phages are studded with antibodylike molecules that grab onto the sugar chains in mucins. This keeps the phages in the mucus, where they have access to bacteria, and suggests that the viruses and the mucus-producing tissue have adapted to be compatible with each other, the team reports online today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Mucus-covered surfaces aren't unique to our insides; the slime can be found throughout the animal kingdom. It protects the whole bodies of fish, worms, and corals, for example. Protective phages seem to be equally widespread: Barr and his colleagues found dense populations of phages in every species they sampled. "It's a novel immune system that we think is applicable to all mucosal surfaces, and it's one of the first examples of a direct symbiosis between phages and an animal host," Barr says.

In this study, the researchers chose the phage and the bacterium, but it's possible that the animal host selects specific phages to control specific types of bacteria, such as by outfitting mucins with particular sugars that those phages recognize. The next step, Barr says, is to explore how this symbiosis works in real-life mucosal surfaces of all types, where many different types of phages and bacteria are interacting.

"This is a novel take on the whole microbiome-host relationship," adds Michael McGuckin, a mucosal biologist from Mater Research, a medical research institute in South Brisbane, Australia, who was not involved in the work. The finding, he says, could provide insights into conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We all have an ecosystem of hundreds of bacterial species in our gut, but patients with IBD have a disrupted ecosystem with different dominant species. These diseases, which include Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, also involve a breakdown in the mucus lining of the gut, he says, and this new study suggests that a failure in phage-based immunity might be the link between those symptoms.

McGuckin is intrigued by the idea that phages may help select the types of bacteria that live inside us. "There's tons of questions around just how this whole system might control microbial populations in the gut, which have increasingly been shown to be important in obesity and diabetes, and all sorts of human conditions."

It may also be possible to design a mucus-compatible phage that could fight infection or alter the body's microbial balance, although that possibility is still very distant. This work, Barr says, "forces us to reevaluate the role of phages. Hopefully this will get people thinking about what they do and how we can use them to help us and combat disease."

Posted in Biology The Microbes That Make Us

http://news.sciencemag.org/2013/05/friendly-viruses-protect-us-against-bacteria


I wonder with there being just a few beneficial viruses for the average human being, if this is a 'default position' of sorts - a reflection of our "immediate environment" - our Earth. As above so below. Just as we have detrimental viruses such as Ebola on a micro level, so we have psychopaths on a macro scale. If viruses are a "transdimensional manifestation" - as the Cs say, or "Thoughts made manifest", then the continual input and application of knowledge (information) would seem to be vital for our health and well being, on multiple levels (physically, emotionally, spiritually, cosmically etc). As I understand it, by engaging in the Work, BEing and DOing, we really do 'reap what we sow', or 'become what we think' by virtue of the FRV we create.


Session 30 March 2002

A: Viruses make inroads only when there exists gaps in consciousness. A full field of awareness closes the gaps. Heal the soul by means of increased knowledge which leads to DNA modification which closes gaps...To do it otherwise amounts to self violation of lesson profiles elected by the self.

Q: (A) What about the healers? All these healers they go around the world and they heal. Most of the time, their effects are temporary. Will they heal only those people who come and ask? And usually when they come and ask, they are asking in a specific way for them to be healed. I mean I don't know what is so specific but, the question is, of course, they don't close the consciousness gap. Or do they? How do they heal? I mean, they can kill even viruses some way. How do they do that?

A: If the healing is true, it occurs at multiple levels. It is an interaction of prior choice potential.
 
I just found another mention of this topic, even making an Ebola connection, but I'm not sure it's trustworthy:

_http://thesymbiontfactorblog.com/2014/08/04/ebola-and-the-microbiome-facts-you-need-to-know/
How did the Ebola (and HIV) viruses begin to affect humans, instead of remaining diseases of animals? One current theory that is gaining momentum has to do with our micro-microbiome. Most of the microbiome discussed in The Symbiont Factor is bacterial, but humans can also have viral microbiomes. Some viruses exist within us and serve useful purposes! One such virus is a “primate T-cell retrovirus” that occurs only in areas that have had high levels of malaria for many generations. This virus elevates levels of T-cells that combat malaria, providing greater resistance to malaria. The use of anti-malarial drugs has caused development of drug resistance in this virus, also providing a pathway for the Ebola and HIV viruses to cross species barriers and infect humans. So, it is possible that in effect, we caused the Ebola and HIV problem. (Parris)

While the above states this like it's a proven fact, it appears to be referencing this paper:
_http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030698770700148X
Summary

In previous papers, I have rejected both the zoonosis and the serial transfer hypotheses of the origin and evolution of the current lethal pandemic strains of HIV. The hypothesis that fits the critical observations is that all the human and nonhuman primate species in central Africa (an area of hyper-endemic malaria) have shared (through inter-species transfers) a “primate T-cell retrovirus” (PTRV), which has adapted to each host species. This retrovirus is believed to assist primate T-cells attack the liver stage of the malaria infection. Each geographic region has a dominant primate host and a characteristic virus. [...]
I can only access the summary of this paper, but by the wording it appears to just be a hypothesis at this point. Maybe there is further info in the body of the paper?
 
A fascinating and scholarly thread, indeed. I'd like to add that off the top of my head I have this memory of reading somewhere that there is a strain of the common cold virus which is known to attack melanoma. Thus a human suffering a 'cold' may be benefiting from this infection in unknown ways.
I think that there is a lot of future for microbiologists, and I admire the work of Dr. Hulda Clark in this field. One of her concepts was that parasites such as flukes, harbour smaller pathogens such as bacteria, and these in turn harbour the smaller virii.
You kill one parasite, and it releases its contents, causing the 'Herxheimer reaction', or flu-like symptoms.
Parasites have many stages of development, which can infect various organs in the body, producing a variety of symptoms depending on the stage of development, and the organ it is lodged in.
Dr. Clark devised a method of detoxing the body with her 'zapping' to kill the parasite, followed by various herbal treatments to flush the invaders from the kidneys and liver.
She gave her information to the world freely and in full, but I think she raised the ire of the establishment in so doing. Her work is discussed elsewhere in the forum.
 
Another good interview with Sayer Ji on the same topic, from the recent Microbiome 2 summit:

http://microbiomemedicinesummit.com/expert/sayer-ji/
 
This is interesting; just as the C's said - viruses are information packets. Here we go:

"Once you start thinking in terms of microbiome, the virus-no-virus debate turns into a false binary, as it should. The concept that microorganisms exist as single cells began to change as it became increasingly obvious that microbes do not run around as single stalking predators, but occur in communities within complex systems in which species interactions and communication are critical.

Viruses exist as genetic “signals”, transferring packets of information within our bodies, between them and across our ecosystems. Contrary to propaganda pushed by Netflix and its subsidiary, the CDC, neither bacteria nor viruses can cause “global pandemics”. Viruses can be thought of as a communication and messaging protocol/language of microorganisms (and cells in multicellular organisms). Thus, they do not cause an “infection”, but may be involved in cellular miscommunication that accompanies a disease (synonymous to imbalance) state.

Can viruses be modified and turned into a weapon? If you start thinking about it using the communication paradigm, it maybe easier to understand. These artificially made DNA/RNA messages [can be likened to] garbled genetic spam mail [and] can be deployed in the environment and be detected by the PCR techniques. PCR cannot understand what message you got (make a diagnosis), it can simply detect that there is a message with certain letters in it. That’s how the evildoers created the hoax pandemic: by simply pushing quantities of genetic spam mail and then running the letter detectors in overdrive to detect particular signatures. Simple concept, really.

Any guesses as to why our abusers in government wanted our defenses lowered when spamming us with their cellular garbage messaging that they funded, manufactured and deployed in this war?"
 
While recently in Moscow they’ve announced a Measles outbreak (big pharma again tries to terrify and make people get vaccinated, even 4 universities were closed and transferred for a distance learning)...So I’ve started to study about it and came across an interesting information. It turns out that some viruses can kill cancer cells. Among them are measles, herpes, smallpox and some others. What interesting , these virus treatment doesn’t work for people who is vaccinated against this pathogen: their bodies produce antibodies that attack it. So this is another big pharma trick...

Here’s the link to Academic research paper “Measles virus as an oncolytic agent”

Вирус кори как онколитический агент

Here’s some extracts from one of the articles about it:

Stacey Erholtz, a fifty-year-old woman from Minnesota (USA), who suffered from multiple myeloma and agreed to an experimental treatment. Stacey was given a live measles vaccine at a dosage that would be enough to vaccinate 10 million people. At present, five years later, Mrs. Erholtz is alive.

Stacey was treated by a professor of molecular medicine at the Mayo Clinic, Dr. Stephen Russell.

Ergolts was recently invited as a speaker at the International Conference on Oncolytic Viruses in Oxford (England). The woman spoke about her life, about what debilitating treatments she had to endure since 2004, when she was diagnosed with cancer. It seemed to her that the chemotherapy courses would drag on forever and never end. She then decided to try a new treatment using measles viruses.

As part of her treatment for myeloma, she underwent two stem cell transplants, leaving her immune system unprepared for the virus. The pathogen was introduced into her body shortly after a recurrence of the disease occurred after the second stem cell transplant. At this time, the woman's body had much less tumor cells than most myeloma patients.

In addition, Stacey's tumor cells had many mutations, and this may have caused the immune system to respond more strongly to them.

Stacey Erholtz has now returned to her old job. She set up a small foundation when she thought the measles virus would be a panacea for cancer. The woman managed to raise some money, and now she plans to use the money to create a website that will highlight the results of research on viral therapy in oncology.

Онкобольная, получившая массивную дозу вируса кори, находится в ремиссии уже 5 лет « Клиники «Евроонко» | Клиники «Евроонко»
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom