chan wrote:
>In article <3kolh2$b8k at styx.uwa.edu.au> Alec Redwood,
>aredwood at uniwa.uwa.edu.au writes:
>>: Can anyone tell me about TH3 cells and/or direct me to an article.
>>>These cells were coined by those working in EAE model. They found high
>TGFb producers when fed MBF orally. The cells did not fit into neat TH1
>or TH2 so they coined the term. I think this is bunk. There is no clear
>Th1 or Th2 anyway. These cells are far more versatile than those in
^^^^^^^^^^
>Huh?!?
>CD4+ TH1 cells have decidedly different cytokine production than CD4+TH2
>cells. There is evidence that one cell type can downregulate the other
>cell type (or phenotype, if you think they are the same cell). However,
>it's interesting to note that Fas Ligand-mediated cytoxicity/apoptosis is
>mediated by TH1 CD4+ cells and not the TH2 CD4+ cells (This doesn't
>exclude the CD8+ cells from carrying on a non-calcium
>dependent/Fas-dependent mechanism of lysis of target cells, of course.)
Derek,
ok, i think i kind of agree with the ambiguities that David was
mentioning. you say huh, but what about the inconsistancies associated with
th1-th2 cells? like in the _same_ disease model one lab getting th1 but
another (competing) lab getting th2 type? it's neat to note the FAS
connection, but has anyone else done that and reproducably gotten a th1
phenotype? i mean, it does make sense that the killer enhancing th's would
"kill" via fas and gld, but has anyone else show it? _also_, is any one
getting closer to some sort of marker for the th's? (other than the
suppoesed cytokine differences)
again, i think that the th1 cth2 "paradigm" has a way to go to be really
accepted as undisputable. just call me a th1-th2 agnostic-i'm just waiting
for some real good proof.
ralph
Ralph M. Bernstein
Dept of Micro/Immuno
University of Arizona
Ph: 602 626 2585
Fx: 602 626 2100
