Posted by gary g (208.133.221.148) on November 04, 1999 at 12:40:03:
In Reply to: Revision and submission (re:for your consideration) posted by Michel L on November 04, 1999 at 06:49:06:
OK
nicely knit process hypothesis
if we go for viral damage,
again :
why do they switch sides in some individuals, if myelin sheath damage is irreversable, it would seem that your model might progress from occurring on ONE side, to both - but wonder about it switching sides
POSSIBLE answer to that challenge:
in the cluster/attack itself there is some mediating effect which reduces the spread of the pathology to other areas, so whichever side is MOST vulnerable at the time of "firing", suffers the attack, and this blocks occurence elsewhere, by the unknown mediating effect
OK - that's a maybe, but let's use it:
i LIKE your theory for the circadian (daily) cycle scheduling - behaviorally we affect the O2 in the blood, when we do something that reduces the O2, under "attack ripe" circumstances we get nailed
also addresses O2 efficacy -
allied with its vasoconstriction properties, O2 aparently stimulates seratonin release - which can help cycle back to stopping the attack - which (A) is what happens with most of us and (B) fits nicely with your model
BUT -
what about the ANNULAR cycling, usually called seasonality of cluster occurence -
if you are trying to build a "perfect" model (I understand what you mean by use of that word in this context )the seasonality has to be accounted for
THIS IS NOT AN ARGUMENT !
I have some similarly extensive ideas/theories about the annualr seasonality from a grosser perspective, rather than the fine focus physiological aspect you're taking
they are VERY compatable if we can get a handle of the seasonality
if for some reason you don't want to extend this on the CHMB, please email
THANKS ! Gary