In article <3otmsc$jsf at jhunix1.hcf.jhu.edu>,
cthoburn at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu <Chris Thoburn> wrote:
[snip]
>>Actually I think that this is flawed logic. These types of results can be used
>to generate a better guess at how components of the immune system may work, but
>I don't think one should assume that the components necessarily work the same
>once assembled. I think that interpretation of the 'normal' role of the immune
>system must be drawn from experiments on a 'normal' immune system.
>> Chris Thoburn
>I agree that in the end we must try and understand the natural state of the
system, but that doesn't preclude collecting data in an artificial system.
You just have to be very careful how much emphasis you put on the results.
For example I am interested in antibody structure and function. A lot of
classical data concerns the use of antibodies from one species, target
antigens from another and complement or Fc receptors from a third. The
conservation of structure/function across species means that these
experiments gave some useful results. However now through the use of
recombinant technologies I am able to study the interactions of human
antibodies with human complement or human Fc receptors and with
physiological antigens. It's a much more realistic system but I don't
ditch everything we learnt before.
Mike Clark, mrc7 at cam.ac.ukhttp://www.path.cam.ac.uk/MikeClark/
--
o/ \\ // || ,_ o Dr. M.R. Clark, Division of Immunology
<\__,\\ // __o || / /\, Cambridge University, Dept. Pathology
"> || _`\<,_ // \\ \> | Tennis Court Rd., Cambridge CB2 1QP
` || (_)/ (_) // \\ \_ Tel. 01223 333705 Fax. 01223 333875
