In article <q7YY3.67944$it.1671737 at news2.rdc1.on.home.com>, Tyson
<URL:mailto:tyson at canada.com> wrote:
> that's why haptens are called haptens and not antigens....
>> ...haptens are too small to illicit an immune response...small organic
> molecules or metals are too small to be recognised and therefore require a
> carrier protein to bring about an adaptive response
> ....haptens cannot recruit T-cell help...but the addition of a
> chemicaly-linked carrier protein allows the priming of T-cells with peptide
> from the carrier
>> <Jenfromwcu at AOL.COM> wrote in message news:0.5fa1cde4.2564a927 at aol.com...> | Why do haptens need a carrier protein? Why can't they elicit and immune
> | response themselves?
>>>Just as a comment on the above I prefer the more correct use of the term
'immunogen' for something which is able to generate an immune response ie
it is immunogenic. It is possible to have 'antigens' that are not
'immunogens'. Of course 'haptens' as you describe them above are a subset
of 'antigens' but not all 'antigens' are 'haptens'.
Mike Clark, <URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/>
--
o/ \\ // || ,_ o M.R. Clark, PhD. Division of Immunology
<\__,\\ // __o || / /\, Cambridge University, Dept. Pathology
"> || _`\<,_ // \\ \> | Tennis Court Rd., Cambridge CB2 1QP
` || (_)/ (_) // \\ \_ Tel.+44 1223 333705 Fax.+44 1223 333875
