commensal Lactobacillus is transformed w/ gene sequence of Borrelial OspA w/ Yersinia pestis

[kickysnana]

(Fwd for a wider distribution:)

Is anyone as bewildered as I am by the proposal for an oral Osp A based Lyme vaccine which the notorious Dattwyler published a few months ago?

Ref-"Oral immunization with recombinant Lactobacillus plantarum induces a protective immune response in the Lyme disease mouse model" , del Rio et al, Clin. Vaccine Immunol. doi:10.1128/CVI.00169-08 published online July 2008)

Throughout the paper, which describes trials of a vaccine administered intragastrically and also orally to mice, Dattwyler and his colleagues emphasise how important it is to use these routes, rather than the parenteral route. It is absolutely essential, they say, to induce mucosal immunity. But why?

The vaccine consists of a commensal Lactobacillus strain harbouring recombinant OspA. Now let's remember that we were all told that the Osp A vaccines work by destroying OspA-expressing borrelia ***in the tick***.

Not in the blood, and certainly not in the mucous membrane, but ***in the midgut of the tick***.

So why then do we need a vaccine delivery method designed to induce mucosal, as opposed to systemic, immunity?

A patent published this year by Dattwyler seems to explain it. He describes a method in which the commensal Lactobacillus is transformed with a gene sequence for Borrelial OspA combined with virulence factors from Yersinia pestis, the agent of plague.

He then claims that you could use the same method to genetically hook almost any antigen, from any pathogen at all, onto borrelial OspA, express your recombinant creation in the harmless Lactobacillus, and produce vaccines and cures that way.

He champions, in this patent, his method as being ideal not only for vaccinating against plague, and against Lyme itself, but also against a whole range of other bacterial diseases, viral diseases including AIDS, fungal infections, protozoal and even worm infestations.

He goes into some detail in some of his writings about how easy it is to administer oral vaccines, how much more acceptable it is to the public, how you could do it quickly en masse if necessary, how you would not need trained personnel and could do it in "resource-poor" environments.

All well and good. We could assume so far that Dattwyler is just anxious to protect poor people in the developing world from plague, Lyme, HIV or whatever.

But somehow I don't think so.

With plague and the other well-known bioweapons, the likelihood is that a victim would be exposed by the airborne route. So it is easy to see that a vaccine that produced antibodies in the respiratory mucosa would be invaluable.

And with AIDS, the value of a strong localised immunity in the genital mucous membrane is obvious.

But why is mucosal immunity to OspA needed in humans to be protected from Lyme?

If the whole point, (as Dattwyler himself re-iterates), of an OspA vaccine is to destroy Bb ***in the tick***, during the actual process of the tick feeding on a human being, why the burning need to have an active anti-OspA immune response in the lining of our larynx, gut, lungs, vagina or rectum? Let's face it, we don't really expect ticks to be crawling into any of those places (let's hope!)

Dattwyler concludes his July 2008 paper on the oral vaccine with these words:

"We report the development of an oral, live vaccine delivery vehicle based on a bacteria 'generally regarded as safe' by the FDA. Our method of expressing vaccine antigens in L. plantarum induces both systemic and mucosal immunity after oral
administration.

"Standard parenteral vaccines do not induce mucosal immunity and the
failure to do so has led to vaccine failures even in the face of strong systemic immunity.

"Our platform technology, in addition to the effective oral vaccine that is described for
Lyme disease, can be expanded upon and applied to design oral vaccines against
several microbial pathogens and possibly, some allergens.

"Some examples of potential mucosal vaccines include targets to Y. pestis, B. anthracis and F. tularensis. These airborne, Category A bioterrorism agents would greatly benefit from a mucosal and systemic double-edged immune response."

So, if the real point of inventing the new Lyme vaccine was not to prevent Lyme, but to showcase a method for preventing aerosolised nasties, why use Lyme's OspA as the vaccine target?

An antigen expressed almost exclusively in the midgut of a tick, and "switched off" before the bug enters our bodies via the feeding tick.... we should never expect to meet OspA via the airborne route, nor indeed on any of our mucous membranes.

Or does Dattwyler have other information which he is not sharing?

There are many other strange issues thrown up by Dattwyler's work in this field, but I'll leave it at that for now.

I'd be ineterested to know if anyone else finds all this as puzzling as I do.

Elena

(FYI Dattwyler is "notorious" because Lyme Disease only exsists if Dattwyler makes money on it. He has sat on panels and made sure that they say that Lyme is easily detected and cured with minimal antibiotics. Then why do we need a Lyme vaccine and why should we trust Dr Dattwyler to do the right thing now? A quote:

“Chronic Lyme disease is just not accepted by the vast majority of physicians,” he told Reuters Health. “The majority of people who get the diagnosis of chronic Lyme disease have either depression, fibromyalgia or another chronic illness.”)