z-logo
Premium
Musings About Regulation by T‐Suppressors: A Response to the Commentary by Kristofor Ellestad on ‘Meanderings into the Regulation of Effector Class by the Immune System: Derivation of the Trauma Model’
Author(s) -
Cohn M.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of immunology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.934
H-Index - 88
eISSN - 1365-3083
pISSN - 0300-9475
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-3083.2012.02723.x
Subject(s) - effector , bystander effect , suppressor , class (philosophy) , autoimmunity , function (biology) , biology , immune system , immunology , neuroscience , microbiology and biotechnology , genetics , epistemology , philosophy , cancer
Any discussion of the regulation of effector class must include feedback control on the magnitude of the response. The induced effector activities are biodestructive and ridding. They are, in and of themselves, unspecific with respect to self and nonself. Consequently all responses include some level of innocent bystander pathology. The regulation of magnitude is essential to keeping this level of pathology at an evolutionarily acceptable level. This is my postulated role of suppressor T‐cells, more popularly referred to as Treg. In order to perform this function they must be somatically selected to be anti‐nonself like all other T/B‐cells. If correct, any role that they might play in determining normal tolerance is excluded. As the commentary of Ellestad illustrates, their function to regulate autoimmunity is the consensus view today and, therefore, this competing concept and my analysis of suggested papers should invite a wide ranging debate.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here