Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / September 2005
New research Strategy: Inhibition of Cortisol Metabolism in the Lung
|
|
Thread rating:  |
aroberts - 14 Sep 2005 17:24 GMT A New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol Metabolism in the Lung
11b-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2 (11b-HSD2) is the enzyme responsible for conversion of the anti-inflammatory hormone cortisol to cortisone in the lung and kidney, thus inactivating glucocorticoid response in these tissues. We propose to develop the first potent and selective small-molecule inhibitor of 11b-HSD2 as a potential new therapy for asthma. Our hypothesis is that inhibition of 11b-HSD2 in the lung will prevent conversion of the anti-inflammatory steroid cortisol to inactive cortisone in the lung epithelium, resulting in reduced bronchial tube swelling associated with asthma attacks. Vastly different levels of 11b-HSD2 are expressed in the lung compared to other organs, providing an avenue for potent inhibition in the lung without significant inhibition systemically. Interestingly, a steroidal natural product isolated from licorice, glycyrrizic acid, has been used to treat asthma since the 16th century and is a potent inhibitor of 11b-HSD2. Glycyrrizic acid binds to the steroid binding site of 11b-HSD2 which is common to several cortisol/cortisone metabolizing enzymes and is thus pleiotropic in its effects. We propose to generate inhibitors of 11b-HSD2 which bind to the NAD+ binding pocket to achieve highly specific and tight binding inhibitors. In support of this approach, our laboratory has discovered a potent and selective NADPH competitive inhibitor of carbonyl reductase 1, an enzyme in the short-chain dehydrogenase reductase family which includes 11b-HSD2. Using this inhibitor as a lead structure, we propose synthesize analogs which are specific for 11b-HSD2 as a potential alternative or adjunct to synthetic corticosteroid treatment for asthma.
Kevan Shokat, Ph.D.
Peregrine - 15 Sep 2005 00:53 GMT Have been trying licorace Tea and DHEA based on these ideas let you know later how it goes.
> A New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol > Metabolism in the Lung [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Kevan Shokat, Ph.D. mcs - 15 Sep 2005 02:04 GMT what happened to bacteria and germ theory?
>A New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol > Metabolism in the Lung [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Kevan Shokat, Ph.D. ARoberts - 15 Sep 2005 04:51 GMT > what happened to bacteria and germ theory? You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of asthma, and it has to be pollution. Medicine is really tidy and neat and simple. You can never have lacerations from anything but a knife. Blindness can be caused only by staring at the sun. Cancer is only the result of smoking. All other possibilities should be dismissed, because it is much too convenient to believe in one paradigm, even if it can't be supported by scientific evidence. Some people are so superior, they...just...know. Say hi to Napoleon.
>>A New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol >> Metabolism in the Lung [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> >> Kevan Shokat, Ph.D. mcs - 15 Sep 2005 14:06 GMT >> what happened to bacteria and germ theory? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > scientific evidence. Some people are so superior, they...just...know. > Say hi to Napoleon. I see your way more concerned with me and whether I am right or not , then to worry about the possibility that when people leave polluted areas, their asthma symptoms might improve, especially but not exlcusively for adult onset asthma. . This is , at the very least is what one could rationalize ( except you) worth worrying about then trying to unravel the biological breakdown of what happens when you put people into a gas chamber Or polluted area long enough and trying to explain why or what to do about without worrying about telling those to leave or stop poisoing them to begin WITH. Then if you are so bold you might want to do comparison studies and see the health and our problems from people who are in two different pollution level environments. Sure other factors might play into asthma but if as a nation our weather people ignore the Warning level bad air days, and no one asks the President why there are now 16 percent of kids with asthma , then obviously there are those like you Roberts that really don't care about getting people with asthma out of harms way.
>>>A New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol >>> Metabolism in the Lung [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >>> >>> Kevan Shokat, Ph.D. aroberts - 15 Sep 2005 15:51 GMT What I don't care about is misinformation that is posted over and over by an mission poster who is not very coherent or rational. I don't know of anyone who doubts that respiratory problems are exacerbated by air pollution. You have claimed that asthma is caused by pollution, and pollution only. You don't support it with evidence, just more ranting.
mcs - 17 Sep 2005 07:36 GMT > What I don't care about is misinformation that is posted over and over > by an mission poster who is not very coherent or rational. I don't > know of anyone who doubts that respiratory problems are exacerbated by > air pollution. You have claimed that asthma is caused by pollution, > and pollution only. You don't support it with evidence, just more > ranting. I said that many people who have asthma doesn't understand that where they live might have a huge effect on their condition . If I am an example it can spell the difference between wheezing for breath or breathing normally. The air ratings chart bears out my findings where they warn people who are sensitive . The key points I try to bring out is often people who are asthmatic or have breathing problems might only need to find a clean air state to see their conditions improve. Instead of worrying about whether I see pollution as causing onset adult asthma or not, worry about people getting out of harms way. Worry about stopping the conditions that causes the severity of problems from pollution and govt policy . Since you can't prove pollution doesn't cause onset adult asthma, the prudent thing to worry about is if there is a connection between pollutiona and asthma and there does seem to be. Of course your more then welcome to prove by correlations that pollution and asthma is NOT connected. or why you should worry about me being wrong more then you should worry about govt policies affecting those negative respiratory conditions .
ARoberts - 17 Sep 2005 14:42 GMT >> What I don't care about is misinformation that is posted over and over >> by an mission poster who is not very coherent or rational. I don't >> know of anyone who doubts that respiratory problems are exacerbated by >> air pollution. You have claimed that asthma is caused by pollution, >> and pollution only. You don't support it with evidence, just more >> ranting. Of course your more then welcome to prove by correlations
> that pollution and asthma is NOT connected. or why you should worry about > me being wrong more then you should worry about govt policies affecting > those negative respiratory conditions . This is where you display your lack of logic. It is your positive burden to prove your claims. No one worries about your being wrong, just that which you are claiming. I couldn't care less about you.
mcs - 17 Sep 2005 15:53 GMT >>> What I don't care about is misinformation that is posted over and over >>> by an mission poster who is not very coherent or rational. I don't [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >connection with studies over and over again. I don't see that with bacteria >nor do I ever expect to lol I know people escape their asthma by going to different places and so if it was a bacteria thing it would follow them More precisely , whatever causes asthma the fact that many people might not need their meds if they moved to clean air state is most prophetic. Whether asthma is caused by smoking and pollution or if asthma is only caused by smoking , the fact might remain that where there is allot of pollution , there is allot of asthma. What if the studies suggest that in places with clean air , and for people who never smoked there was hardly any adult onset asthma? That just may prove my theory. In any case, the correlations of early death and pollution and comparing the ratio of people with asthma symptoms and number of times they need to medicate with same people in clean air cities would show that pollution might be a giant contributing facor of asthma , I suggest you worry more about that then whether its the total reason for onset adult asthma or not. You think we can get the govt to pay for our forced poisoning?
ARoberts - 18 Sep 2005 00:36 GMT >>>> What I don't care about is misinformation that is posted over and over >>>> by an mission poster who is not very coherent or rational. I don't [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>doctor said adult onset asthma and pollution are connected.I see the >>connection with studies over and over again. Then (surprise) you are either ignoring the peer-reviewed studies or too monomaniacal to concede that they exist. When your doctor makes the claim that adult-onset asthma and pollution are connected, does he show you any studies that demonstrate this, or is he just guessing, as you are? Look at the National Jewish Hospital and Dr. Hahn's websites for their studies about bacteria-related asthma--if you can stand the disruption of having your tidy preconceptions shattered.
I don't see that with bacteria
>>nor do I ever expect to lol > I know people escape their asthma by going to different places and so if > it was a bacteria thing it would follow them I know a lot of people who have moved to other locales to "escape their asthma" and were disappointed to find that it didn't work. So what? The anecdotal musings of people (including your doctor) are not evidence.
Whether
> asthma is caused by smoking and pollution or if asthma is only caused by > smoking , the fact might remain that where there is allot of pollution , > there is allot of asthma. Well, it is certainly diagnosed more often now, but much of that has to do with improved diagnostics, not just the incidence of the disease. Do you really believe that the air quality is worse now than when most of the homes were heated by high-sulphur coal, there were no constraints on air pollution--and no EPA at all?
What if the studies suggest that in places with
> clean air , and for people who never smoked there was hardly any adult > onset asthma? That just may prove my theory. That's a lot of what-ifs stacked on maybes. If you have any studies that corroborate your theory, here's where to insert them. You just keep posting air quality reports and pretending that they are studies about pollution causing asthma. It's a fiction.
> I suggest you worry more about that then whether its the total reason for > onset adult asthma or not. People who endlessly post misinformation need to refrain from suggestions.
> You think we can get the govt to pay for our forced poisoning? Well, there it is. You are looking for a government handout to support you. Try getting a job.
NorthShoreCEO - 15 Sep 2005 17:52 GMT > I see your way more concerned with me and whether I am right or > not , then to worry about the possibility that when people [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > like you Roberts that really don't care about getting people > with asthma out of harms way. And what part of your life are YOU responsible for?
Bob - 15 Sep 2005 14:51 GMT >> what happened to bacteria and germ theory? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >evidence. Some people are so superior, they...just...know. Say hi to >Napoleon. Sometimes I wanna get away from all the confusion causin' pollution! I know you wish you could run away from this institution Cause there's no solution to survive, because, The first cut is the deepest, baby I know, and She was blinded by the light, Cut loose like a deuce, another runner in the night. Mama always told me not to look into the sights of the sun. Oh, but Mama, that's where the fun is... Oh, you poor little cigarette! How they're stomping and crushing you today. They're blaming you for cancer when you can still get cholesterol from butter and fat from lard and bacon. And all these meats and cheeses that are causing heart attacks and tumors... Why are they picking on you, oh sly cigarette? It's not fair, somebody has to protest! You do well to pick the Bon-a-parte...
00doc - 15 Sep 2005 16:49 GMT > > what happened to bacteria and germ theory? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > evidence. Some people are so superior, they...just...know. Say hi to > Napoleon. That's not what I thought caused blindness.
 Signature 00doc
aroberts - 15 Sep 2005 17:21 GMT > You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of asthma, and it has > to be pollution. Medicine is really tidy and neat and simple. You can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > evidence. Some people are so superior, they...just...know. Say hi to > Napoleon.
>That's not what I thought caused blindness. Are you saying that strokes cause blindness? ;-)
NorthShoreCEO - 15 Sep 2005 17:48 GMT >> You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of >> asthma, and it has [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Are you saying that strokes cause blindness? ;-) >\ Boys, please! Some child may be reading this. Me, for example.
Bob - 15 Sep 2005 18:20 GMT >> You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of asthma, and it has >> to be pollution. Medicine is really tidy and neat and simple. You can [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Are you saying that strokes cause blindness? ;-) Ultimately, that's Bush's fault too...
NorthShoreCEO - 15 Sep 2005 19:39 GMT > On 15 Sep 2005 09:21:57 -0700, "aroberts" > <a-roberts1@comcast.net> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Ultimately, that's Bush's fault too... Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww..............
Bob - 15 Sep 2005 21:52 GMT >>>> You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of >>>> asthma, and it has [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.............. Well, ok, so this hits just a little below the beltway...
ARoberts - 16 Sep 2005 03:38 GMT >>>>> You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of >>>>> asthma, and it has [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Well, ok, so this hits just a little below the beltway... And it's not as much fun as being in congress...
Bob - 16 Sep 2005 14:26 GMT >>>>>> You're absolutely right. There can be only one cause of >>>>>> asthma, and it has [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >And it's not as much fun as being in congress... Rendering, of course, the use of smear tactics, and in no small measure, stumping for the linguistic control of the erectorate...
00doc - 16 Sep 2005 00:48 GMT >>That's not what I thought caused blindness. > > Are you saying that strokes cause blindness? ;-) Well sure, if you have enough of them. So far I have only managed to require glasses. But I can dream.
 Signature 00doc
Bob - 16 Sep 2005 01:05 GMT >>>That's not what I thought caused blindness. >> >> Are you saying that strokes cause blindness? ;-) > >Well sure, if you have enough of them. So far I have only managed to require >glasses. But I can dream. Please forgive me, but yet once again, I am moved to song:
A dream is a wish your heart makes When you're fast asleep. In dreams you lose your stroke-aches Whatever you wish for, you keep.
Have faith in your dreams and someday Your rainbow will come smiling thru. No matter how your brain is seizing If you keep on believing the dream that you wish will come true.
Lala-lalalala-la-lala....
Alison Chaiken - 15 Sep 2005 04:20 GMT > Our hypothesis is that inhibition of 11b-HSD2 in the lung will > prevent conversion of the anti-inflammatory steroid cortisol to > inactive cortisone in the lung epithelium, resulting in reduced > bronchial tube swelling associated with asthma attacks. As a child I took an asthma drug called "cortisone." Was the drug likely the same substance as the cortisone in the article? Perhaps cortisol can't survive passage through the digestive tract but cortisone can?
 Signature Alison Chaiken "From:" address above is valid. (650) 236-2231 [daytime] http://www.wsrcc.com/alison/ Predators fail often; prey fail only once. -- Tom Evslin
Richard Friedel - 19 Sep 2005 16:49 GMT > A New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol > Metabolism in the Lung > > 11b-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2 (11b-HSD2) .................... > > Kevan Shokat, Ph.D. Is there really a case for the exclusively pharmacological treatment of lung tissues to tackle asthma and bronchitis? See the Carl Sagan baloney identification kit (http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/baloney.htm) :
" * Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are untestable, unfalsifiable are not worth much. "
My personal experience in numerous past attacks of asthma and bronchitis is that reducing the respiration rate (breaths per minute) is a boon. It is also a scientific fact that this reduces blood pressure (research by Benjamin Gavish) You can do this with qigong, as one example, as a safer and more logical method than B u t e y k o. Moving both arms in a circle helps to entrain (put a handle on) and slow down breathing, f. i. to less than 6 breaths a minute. One circle corresponds to one breath. Each breath is done with an emphasis on chest expansion and keeping the abdominal wall under control (so-called yoga complete breath). In other words the system is trained to overcome the difficulty in taking a deep breath typical of asthma.
Somebody recently said here that to believe in the past three US Presidents was imbecilic. Guess the same could be said about the asthma drug theory, which is of course now to be supported by the so grandiose " New Therapeutic Strategy for Asthma: Inhibition of Cortisol Metabolism in the Lung" of Kevan Shokat, Ph.D. Regards, Richard Friedel
|
|
|