posted 22 March 2005 18:37               

Thanks for your patience.

<One can see that he has at least 4 articles in PubMed, where peer-reviewed biomedical research is indexed ( for the PubMed ones, see the ones with a PMID number, references # 2, 6, 7 and 8, at http://trevormarshall.com/papers.htm ). On this site one can find the links directly to the PubMed listings. Eventually PubMed may index some of the older ones. He also has quite a few engineering publications and articles related to the Internet and computers.

It is true, as some have said, that a number of his initial research papers on sarcoidosis have been published in non peer reviewed journals such as clinmed and JOIMR, but his work has broken through that barrier in that he now has a PubMed listed article on the sarcoidosis research in Autoimmunity Reviews. Also, he was chosen to speak at an International Conference among recognized biomedical researchers, and was selected to participate in a collection of works on sarcoidosis by a Russian scientific publisher.

Here is a link to the Autoimmunity Reviews journal, published by Elsevier, a well-known publisher of scientific work: http://authors.elsevier.com/JournalDetail.html?PubID=622356&Precis=DESC

and ones to the International Conference he spoke at: http://www.kenes.com/autoim2004/

He touches on the points of his education and career most relevant to his current work at: http://www.immunesupport.com/library/showarticle.cfm/ID/5784/T/CFIDS_FM/searchtext/Trevor%20Marshall

Joyce Waterhouse, Ph.D.
members.aol.com/SynergyHN
>>

[This message has been edited by joycejcwat101 (edited 24 March 2005).]

posted 23 March 2005 10:46            

You're missing the point - at least you're missing my point.

You're Sooooooo missing my point.

I'd like to discuss the posibile mechanisms at work (or not) with a novel theory. I think that's what most people on the list want... to learn something.

Joyce: can you address the technical issues in the thread? If not,
I'm not sure anyone's really interested in re-hashing someones credentials, or lack of..
That kind of discussion should really be in the "Off-Topic" section.

Barb

posted 23 March 2005 11:31               

You all bring up some good questions and comments on vitamin D and other issues related to the Marshall Protocol and I will do my best to try to address many of them.

On the 1,25 D as an indicator of TH1 immunity, I think one has to look at the entire body of Marshall’s recent writings and look at the references (like Mawer et al, Evidence for Nonrenal Synthesis of 1,25 -Dihydroxyvitamin D in patients with inflammatory arthritis, J. Bone and Mineral Res. 6(7): 1991) as well as Abreu et al, which I post the abstract for below. The basic fact that activated macrophages in sarcoidosis produce 1,25 D is well-known and can be found in any textbook (like Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine). But the use of it more widely as an indicator is something fairly new, though supported to some degree by the Abreu et al and Mawer et al and other studies in molecular medicine. If it were something widely established, then Marshall’s work wouldn’t be considered so innovative. The references I’ve looked at cited by Marshall do suggest it to be a promising way of looking at things and there are a number of references that support the underlying processes (and I also cite and discuss some of them in my vitamin D article at http://members.aol.com/SynergyHN ). His work makes the leap of connecting all the basic research he cites with his newer observations. But I agree, there is still much more work to be done.

On the AIDS study, I am going by the one cited in Marshall’s Autoimmunity Review article (Haug et al 1998). See http://trevormarshall.com/papers.htm for links to all his papers and within those papers you will find many of those he cites, including this one. Haug finds an average for 1,25 D in HIV infected patients of 48 pmol/L. I think the misunderstanding has arisen because they are using different units. To convert to the units used usually in the U.S., you have to divide by about 2.5 to get 18.5 pg/ml (they also state that sometimes the 1,25 D is undetectable, which I suppose may be related to the severity of the infection). This 18.5 is a lower value than I recall seeing posted at the Marshall Protocol.com site. If any were near that, they would have suggested a retest if the sample may have not been frozen or consideration of another diagnosis.

I think with regard to the Mycobacterium, the cause and effect may be reversed, since in HIV the the factor of the destruction of the TH1 immune system is there, which is not occurring in sarcoidosis. Perhaps they are having the Mycobacterium problems because their TH1 immune systems have declined to the point that they have virtually no TH1 cells to fight off the bacteria and thus also have little 1,25 D being produced by macrophages (part of the TH1 response).

I can also say that Dr. Marshall has also analyzed some of the same data that Vieth uses and disagrees with many of his interpretations of it. He is not the only one that disagrees, since Vieth is pushing for higher requirements and a different way of looking at D than the established one.
This is clear from his disagreement with the establishment that he expresses in the first 2 sentences of this abstract:

<Author: Vieth R
Source: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 89-90(1-5): 571-3 2004
Abstract: Official nutrition committee reports in both North America and Europe now state that Vitamin D is more of a hormone than a nutrient. These statements are wrong, and do not reflect the definitions of either vitamin or hormone.>>

I have still to look more deeply into Vieth’s work myself, but another example that would seem to contradict Vieth’s work is this study by Adams et al ( http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/127/3/203 ) involving generally healthy patients rather than ones with TH1 disease, who have had bone loss due to too much 25 D from supplements (much of it not even being on the label). Some of their data in Table 1 and the graphs, shows that they were losing bone at some of the levels of 25 D that Vieth seems to think to be O.K. or even recommended (remember to divide by 2.5 for 1,25 D and 2.6 for 25 D). Their bone mineral density improved by stopping D supplementation.

The amount they took would have been a much greater problem if they had sarcoidosis or a related disease with D dyregulation. If one looks at the data in Table 1, their 1,25 D levels aren’t nearly as high as they would be in a sarc. patient, given their very high 25 D levels.

I don’t mean to say that some of the studies showing that older people, especially who live in the North, like in Canda or Finland etc... may not need more vitamin D in their diet for osteoporosis prevention. But I think Vieth goes too far in the levels he recommends and he doesn’t know about this new data that shows that the situation of sarcoidosis, of dysregulated vitamin D, is not just a tiny fraction of the public, but may occur in more like 5-10 %. I also don’t think his view that a certain amount of increase of PTH is necessarily synonymous with bone loss, and I don’t think it is accepted very widely yet by others either, but the PTH part is something I need to look into more.

This paper by Abreu et al., on Crohns and Ulcerative Colitis (see abstract below), indicates that 60 pg/ml of D or greater would be detrimental and lead to bone loss. They use a somewhat higher cut off for the point at which bone loss occurs than the 45 pg/ml, but lower than my own 1,25 D value, I believe. I don’t know the basis for Merck’s value, but I believe there is one, and will have to get back to you on that. In any case, the issue of bone loss isn’t what is most significant in Marshall’s use of the 1,25 D test, which he is now using as an indicator, though not a perfect one, of the TH1 vs TH2 dominance.

Title: Measurement of vitamin D levels in inflammatory bowel disease patients reveals a subset of Crohn's disease patients with elevated 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D and low bone mineral density.
Author: Abreu MT , Kantorovich V , Vasiliauskas EA , Gruntmanis U , Matuk R , Daigle K , Chen S , Zehnder D , Lin YC , Yang H , Hewison M , Adams JS
Source: Gut, 53(8): 1129-36 2004
Abstract: OBJECTIVES: Many patients with Crohn's disease (CD) have low bone mineral density (BMD) that may not be solely attributable to glucocorticoid use. We hypothesised that low BMD in patients with CD is associated with elevated circulating levels of the active form of vitamin D, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)(2)D). We further hypothesised that this was secondary to increased synthesis of 1,25(OH)(2)D by inflammatory cells in the intestine. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between 1,25(OH)(2)D levels and BMD in patients with CD. METHODS: An IRB approved retrospective review of medical records from patients with CD (n = 138) or ulcerative colitis (UC, n = 29). Measurements of vitamin D metabolites and immunoreactive parathyroid hormone (iPTH) were carried out. BMD results were available for 88 CD and 20 UC patients. Immunohistochemistry or real time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for the enzyme 1alpha-hydroxylase was performed on colonic biopsies from patients with CD (14) or UC (12) and normal colons (4). RESULTS: Inappropriately high levels of serum 1,25(OH)(2)D (>60 pg/ml) were observed in 42% of patients with CD compared with only 7% in UC, despite no differences in mean iPTH. Serum 1,25(OH)(2)D levels were higher in CD (57 pg/ml) versus UC (41 pg/ml) (p = 0.0001). In patients with CD, there was a negative correlation between 1,25(OH)(2)D levels and lumbar BMD (r = -0.301, p = 0.005) independent of therapeutic glucocorticoid use. 1,25(OH)(2)D levels also correlated with CD activity. Lastly, immunohistochemistry and RT-PCR demonstrated increased expression of intestinal 1alpha-hydroxylase in patients with CD. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that elevated 1,25(OH)(2)D is more common in CD than previously appreciated and is independently associated with low bone mineral density. The source of the active vitamin D may be the inflamed intestine. Treatment of the underlying inflammation may improve metabolic bone disease in this subgroup of patients.

In response to another question, I believe I did feel some improvement on lowered D before I started the Benicar, and others have reported this, also.

On the subject of whether taking vitamin D might protect against diabetes, it is intriguing, and I plan to look into that research. But it may fall into the situation I suggested might be true of MS, that a deficient vitamin D state might allow the bacteria to become established, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that too much D would be beneficial after it is established. Just like with other hormones, being hypo is as bad as being hyper. But more needs to be researched on this.

But I should note that a very new study by a well-known researcher (see Marshall’s discussion of this on the upcoming DVD from the conference from http://autoimmunityresearch.org for more on this) found that in mice that typically got diabetes, inoculation with bacterial antigens in their first 5 weeks caused a dramatic reduction in the rate at which they got diabetes.
I don’t argue that a truly deficient vitamin D level might not be harmful to immunity, in fact I think it is, but it may be that an even more effective prevention method might eventually turn out to be an immunization to certain bacteria. (Edit: I don't give a link to the study because I need to verify information on it when I able to hear the conference again. But I think the researchers name is Bach and that he had previously published in the NEJM and his current work is not yet published).

I also wanted to say on the subject of whether very low mino. levels might really promote bacterial growth, although it might occur in certain circumstances with certain bacteria, that did not at all fit with my experience. The first dose I used on the MP was 3 mg Mino (at a time before they changed the recommendation to begin at 25 mg) and I did get a big Herx. within the first 12 hours (bigger than with 100 mg Mino pre-MP). But over time, the Herxes at the 3 mg dose declined to hardly noticeable, indicating that my immune system, working with the antibiotic, had mostly killed off the bacteria that could be reached using that dose of that one drug. Each time the dose was raised, it seemed as though the Mino was penetrating a little deeper and reaching new bacteria, and then the Herx declined after a while at each dose. I can’t think of any more plausible explanation of this pattern of response, since it has also been accompanied by improvements in my health.

I think the pulsing and low doses of antibiotics may well be more effective than constant dosing, particularly if one thinks of it as being the immune system that is really doing the killing and it’s not simply the antibiotic, which just weakens the bacteria. The way I view it at present, is that too big an initial die-off with too big a dose of antibiotics may raise the inflammation and 1,25 D levels, which then help suppress the immune killing of the bacteria. But it is probably a lot more complicated than that.

However, my point on pulsing is that the bigger Herx at 3 mg on the MP than 100 mg pre-MP in the first 12 hours supports the view that its not only the pulsing that is the difference with the MP, because when comparing only the very first 12 hours of Herxing from the first dose, pulsing can not become an issue. I’m sure there are others on the MP who have done pulsing before they got on the protocol and probably could directly address the issue of whether the MP enhanced the effect independent of the pulsing.

On the issue of fluctuations of 1,25 D with ovulation, I think they may have some relevance for women who are menstruating. But I noticed that paper was rather old and the technique they used was quite new at the time they published and they had only a small sample size, so I’m not sure how much it can be relied on by itself.

I wish it were all more simple and I could do better at explaining it, but for now, this is the best I can do, since I have other demands on my time and am going out of town. As I said, I plan to write more in future and will let you know when I do.

Also, I wanted to mention that I think I may be doing better than some on the MP because I had already minimized my hidden food and chemical allergies/sensitivities. And believe me, for most people, it takes a lot more than one or two allergy tests to accomplish this. I also think that many with CFS and Lyme who may not do as well on MP may have more severe problems with allergies/sensitivities worsening many symptoms and this may be due to a new parasitic roundworm, C. pulmoni (which I also have). You can read about some easy, at-home methods for reducing your sensitivities in articles I have written at the web site below (Issue 5 and 8 and other for food allergy and Issue 7 for the roundworm).

Joyce Waterhouse, Ph.D. http://members.aol.com/SynergyHN

posted 23 March 2005 11:56               

quote:

---

Originally posted by joycejcwat101:
Just for the record and in the interests of accuracy, I wanted to clarify some things about the credentials of Trevor Marshall, Ph.D.,

---

Just for the record and in the interests of accuracy...

According to the Manager of Archives and Records at the University of Western Australia,

"Dr Trevor Gordon Marshall was admitted to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from the University of Western Australia on 23.4.1985. His thesis was entitled "Modelling and Simulation in Diabetes Care"."

and

"Dr Marshall's student file and academic record...both confirm that his PhD was obtained in the unit 064.920 ie Ph.D thesis Electric. There is no other information that refers to a particular discipline although he majored in Electronic Engineering."

The thesis is on file at the library but not available for loan. http://tinyurl.com/6xv2x

He has publicly stated (immunesupport.com) that he came to the U.S. in 1982. According to the University of Western Australia, his PhD was awarded in 1985.

posted 23 March 2005 12:11            

Joyce,

Your statement infered that all PubMed citations represent articles that are peer-reviewed--that is absolutely incorrect. Not all publications that submit to PubMed are peer-review publications.

Indeed, I looked at the Marshall citations you referenced, particularly #2 and #6 since they are related to his current endeavor. One of the references is in Autoimmunity Review which is NOT a peer-reviewed journal. Papers are generally requested by the editorial board and do not go through a blind peer-review process. Moreover, the papers in this publication represent overviews of existing literature, not original research.

As for the other reference (regarding Vitamin D) you cite, that is a LETTER Marshall sent in. Again, not at all a peer-reviewed paper.

I did not look at #7 & #8 as they are not related to the "protocol."

In short, (a) he (yet) has no protocol-related original research that has withstood a rigorous academic review process, and (b) neither of the (non-original research) protocol-related citations were peer reviewed.

While I do not necessarily think that all treatment suggestions (e.g., Abx combo's frequently used in Lyme) need to go through such a process (although that would be optimal), I am instead taking issue with the claim that you made regarding the peer-reviewed nature of these papers.

Finally, one's abilities in one sub-discipline (e.g., engineering) has little relevence to one's abilities in another (e.g., medicine). I do not expect colleagues to read my old work in visual development and be able to make any inferences about my current work in human memory (even though perception and memory are more related than engineering and medicine).

posted 23 March 2005 12:23               

Thank you for taking the time to detail
specifics of the very 'meat' of the theories
surrounding this protocol.

Your post is very helpful in understanding these concepts.

I attended Marshall's presentation at ILADS..
there are just so many levles to try and understand and then apply to its use in multiple infections.

Any insight is always helpful.

posted 23 March 2005 12:26               

It is not uncommon for people to complete their thesis or dissertation work in absentia. There can be a lengthy delay while the committee reviews the dissertation and revisions, and there's no need for the candidate to be present at the university during that time. They just have to return for the defense.

So I don't see a problem there.

posted 23 March 2005 12:52            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sue vG:
I have no opinion on Marshall, but just wanted to say that his coming to the US in '82 and getting his PhD in '85 from W. Aust. is not suspicious.

It is not uncommon for people to complete their thesis or dissertation work in absentia. There can be a lengthy delay while the committee reviews the dissertation and revisions, and there's no need for the candidate to be present at the university during that time. They just have to return for the defense.

So I don't see a problem there.

[This message has been edited by Sue vG (edited 23 March 2005).]

---

Sue vG is absolutely correct about locations and the awarding of degrees.

In fact, I earned my first master's degree from a university in Canada in 1989 but left Canada to come back to the states in 1988. I just made a few trips back and forth to meet with my committee and then present at my final oral defense.

This is quite common in graduate work when the data have already been collected and analysis and write-up is all that is left. Nature of the graduate work beast.

posted 23 March 2005 13:19            

I am guily of asking 1 question early on here, and then it has gotten totally out of hand.

Joyce Waterhouse, please copy/paste your comments to a NEW thread so that the replies go to you. Delete ALL the duplicate posts at that time. Show a very specific title of what the post is about please.

Joyce, please start a NEW thread about Trevor Marshall's credentials so comments only on that will go there.

FYI, I am NOT a moderator on this or any other board. I'm an active lymenet reader who is learning a lot from majority of you more experienced lyme folks.

If we have a NEW topic, please start your OWN thread so the replies apply only to your subject area and not 2-6 other things.

Thank you for your consideration.

The moderators of this board are not actively involved, so that leaves it up to the members to get things straightened out again.

Happy postings.

Penny, I am very sorry for the terrible way you were treated by Trevor on MP. I did not know that yours & Dr. Scott Taylor's I&I board was stopped. I used to read & post a little there.

Betty G., Iowa

Edited to remove Penny's name from the Trevor comment, and showed Joyce's name who originated that part of the post.

Sorry Penny for my mistake. BG

posted 23 March 2005 14:30               

Joyce

quote:

---

Originally posted by pennyhoule:
Not only that, he has a degree in electrical engineering, and apparently has spent most of his time working with computers and trying to unsuccessfuly run a computer related business, Sarc Systems. It went bankrupt and was involved in a number of legal actions. See: http://tinyurl.com/3ksdr

or: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/843650/0000843650-00-000001.txt

Most people with this kind of PhD rarely refer to themselves as "doctor" but it's his perogative.

[This message has been edited by pennyhoule (edited 23 March 2005).]

---

posted 23 March 2005 16:27               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sue vG:
I have no opinion on Marshall, but just wanted to say that his coming to the US in '82 and getting his PhD in '85 from W. Aust. is not suspicious.

It is not uncommon for people to complete their thesis or dissertation work in absentia. There can be a lengthy delay while the committee reviews the dissertation and revisions, and there's no need for the candidate to be present at the university during that time. They just have to return for the defense.

So I don't see a problem there.

[This message has been edited by Sue vG (edited 23 March 2005).]

---

I didn't imply there's anything suspcious about that. Just stating the facts. From then to now, the details of his public resume are somewhat sparse. If Joyce is trying to claim that he's been devoting himself to medical research most of that time, I don't see a lot of evidence to support that scenario. If he has been, then please correct me. I'd feel better if I knew this to be the case.

penny

posted 23 March 2005 16:41               

quote:

---

Originally posted by bettyg:

Penny, please start a NEW thread about Trevor Marshall's credentials so comments only on that will go there.

Betty G., Iowa

---

Hi Betty,

I did not raise the topic of TM's credentials. Most recently, Joyce responded with her version, "in the name of accuracy". So I corrected her statements "in the name of accuracy".

My concern, considering everything that has happened, is that people get only the facts and the truth. And that anything that is not know for sure, be identified for what it is. Speculation.

penny

posted 24 March 2005 18:33               

quote:

---

Originally posted by duramater:
[b]Joyce Waterhouse said:
"One can see that he has at least 4 articles in PubMed, where peer-reviewed biomedical research is indexed (for the PubMed ones, see the ones with a PMID number, references # 2, 6, 7 and 8, at http://trevormarshall.com/papers.htm )."

Joyce,

Your statement infered that all PubMed citations represent articles that are peer-reviewed--that is absolutely incorrect. Not all publications that submit to PubMed are peer-review publications.

Indeed, I looked at the Marshall citations you referenced, particularly #2 and #6 since they are related to his current endeavor. One of the references is in Autoimmunity Review which is NOT a peer-reviewed journal.
Another PhD researcher,
Dura Mater.[/B]

---

Sorry my statements were not quite precise enough. I take your points. I did put in the link to Autoimmunity Reviews and the list of his published work because I thought people could judge for themselves the quality of the journals and could see what work he has been doing.

Personally, I consider being chosen by Editors and Board members of the International journal, Autoimmunity Reviews to be a type of peer review that is as significant as the typical blinded peer review.

For instance, one of the Editors, Schoenfeld, is an expert in autoimmunity and infection, so I think I would take his recommendation over the majority of academic researchers in autoimmunity.

But in any case, I thought by putting in the links showing his publications and that he did have publications in PubMed where most of the best journals are indexed, might be of significance and of interest.

Thanks for pointing out my errors-- I did not intend to mislead. I think people have enough links and viewpoints on his career and publications that they can judge for themselves regarding his credentials. Ultimately, the evidence and the science must be judges on its own merits by reading his work and seeing how it stands up over time.

posted 24 March 2005 18:44               

quote:

---

Originally posted by bettyg:

Joyce Waterhouse, please copy/paste your comments to a NEW thread so that the replies go to you. Delete ALL the duplicate posts at that time. Show a very specific title of what the post is about please.

Joyce, please start a NEW thread about Trevor Marshall's credentials so comments only on that will go there.

Betty G., Iowa

[This message has been edited by bettyg (edited 24 March 2005).]

---

Betty:
I am rather new to posting here.
You are right, I will start another thread where we can discuss the science. I will copy my posts on the science and perhaps we can get some more discussion on that.

I only brought up the credentials in response to several previous comments in this thread and perhaps we can leave it where it is now without a new thread.

Thanks for pointing out all the duplicate posts and to Penny for letting me know how to effectively get rid of them.

It is good to get to interact again with some of you who I knew from the MP sites previously. I hope to learn from you some of the ideas and experiences that you have been sharing on other non MP sites in this more free wheeling and wider ranging atmosphere.

Joyce