In Article <3rlheu$r8i at jhunix1.hcf.jhu.edu>, ejf at welchlink.uoregon.edu
(Ephraim Fuchs) wrote:
>Dr M.R. Clark (mrc7 at cus.cam.ac.uk) wrote:
>>: I accept fully that the logical way out of this is to say that a naive B-cell
>: presents for tolerance. However what about activated B-cells undergoing
>:somatic
>: hypermutation. Experimental evidence shows us that activated B-cells make
>: highly efficient antigen presenters. So how do you deal with altered
>: specificity
>: and idiotype during hypermutation?
>>The solution that Polly Matzinger and I have arrived at is that both
>resting and activated B cells are tolerogenic APCs for naive but not
>memory T cells. We believe that all experiments showing activated B
>cells as good APCs used responder T cells that contain some memory cells
>(even from T cell receptor transgenic mice).
>>By not allowing naive T cells to become activated by antigens presented
>by B cells, the idiotype presentation problem is avoided.
>>Ephraim Fuchs
>ejf at welchink.welch.jhu.edu>
Is this correct:
so what i think that drs fuchs and matzinger are now saying is that
there are no anti-idiotypic antibodies in normal people (since to have an
antiidiotypic secondary response you must have t cell help-and in their
scenario, there cannot be T-cells specific for b cell idiotypes). hint:
there _are_ anti-idiotypic antibodies in normals.
regards, ralph
Ralph M. Bernstein
Dept of Micro/Immuno
University of Arizona
Ph: 602 626 2585
Fx: 602 626 2100
