On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, D Forsdyke wrote:
> > D Forsdyke wrote:
> > > Much confusion is created when the term "naive" T cells
> > >is applied to peripheral T cells which have not yet interacted
> > >with MHC-exogenous peptide complexes (e.g. see Goldrath & Bevan
> > >Nature 18th Nov. 1999).
> > >
> > > These cells are NOT "naive". They have been given a highly
> > >sophisticated "education" in the thymus where they have
> > >"learned" to discriminate based on differential affinity.
>> Kenneth Frauwirth wrote:
>> The fact that the term may have another
> > connotation in standard English doesn't mean that the jargon is confusing
> > to those who use it.
>> Hello,
> "Jargon" is in-group terminology, which generally
> does not confuse "those who use it". But Immunology has
> always been a cross-disciplinary science. If we must use
> jargon we should strive to make it match "the connotation
> in standard English".
Although I have not researched the history of the terminology, I would
imagine that the term "naive" was used to describe T cells prior to
our current understanding of thymic selection. What would you
suggest as a term for resting T cells which have never been activated in
the periphery, keeping in mind that you would be replacing a very common
term with a neologism.
> Furthermore, jargon A should be consistent with jargon B.
> If we are going to use the jargon term "educated" for T cells
> leaving the thymus, then we should not, in the next breath,
> call them "naive".
I think that the inconsistency here may be in the use of the term
"educated". A T cell in the periphery has been *selected*, and has
differentiated, but has it been "educated" in the sense of the more common
usage? The "education" is generally evident at the systemic level
(self/non-self discrimination), rather than at the T cell level, since
individual T cells are still unable on their own to distinguish self from
non-self peptides, as indicated by models such as the NOD mouse or Diane
Mathis' arthritic mouse.
Further, it seems to me that "naive" and "educated" are far from antonyms;
I would argue that "experienced" is much closer to the opposite of
"naive". An 18-year old college freshman is certainly educated, to some
degree, but may also be very naive. "Book smarts" and "street smarts"
result from different education processes, and a person who possesses the
former without the latter might still be considered "naive". A "naive"
peripheral T cell has "book smarts", but has never gone through the
process of mounting an immune response, while a memory T cell has "street
smarts" as well (previous antigen encounter primes it for faster and more
robust response the second time around).
Ken Frauwirth
Ken Frauwirth (MiSTie #33025) kfrauwir at midway.uchicago.edu
Abramson Cancer Research Institute
University of Pennsylvania
http://mail.med.upenn.edu/~kfrauwir
"Science is not the way to find answers to all of our questions.
Science is a way to find better questions." - C. Barrans
--
Ken Frauwirth (MiSTie #33025) kfrauwir at midway.uchicago.edu
Abramson Cancer Research Institute
University of Pennsylvania
http://mail.med.upenn.edu/~kfrauwir
