UC diagnoses are increasing day by day what do you think?

I found it interesting that on the flyers in my GI's office it now states that they are researching whether there may be an infectious cause. The flyer I got when I was diagnosed just two years ago called it autoimmune pretty definitely. No mention of bacterial or viral causes at that time.

Connor77 said...
There are people who truly have a genetic disease, less than 1% of patients.

Evidence for this claim please.

Connor77 said...
I pray to god that the MAP vaccine under development is a success. It could save so many people and expose this crime against humanity once and for all. We just need better diagnostic methods, it's the only missing piece of the puzzle that would prove, in a widespread way, that our food is infectious.

Hate to disappoint you but on the MAP Vaccine website, they explicitly state this about UC: It is not caused by MAP but is thought to be an auto-immune disease, the trigger for which is still unknown.

Maybe the huge increase in commercials has made people more comfortable to come forward. I see commercials constantly. kidding... but there are so many variables. It seems like there's no real commonality generally speaking. We are a very diverse group. I always wanted to believe I had some sort of infection, but over time, it didn't pan out.

/www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x3lq8QEg5g

Don't forget that the population is larger and more people have health insurance. This will lead to more people being diagnosed. If you've been on this forum long enough you'll see that people come here seasonally, mostly in the fall and spring after their diagnoses.

I don't remember taking antibiotics as a child, and I never had any stomach issues as a kid. I rarely got sick.

Thanks for sharing the link, xy123, I got a lot out of it.

Connor77 said...

ks1905 said...
Don't forget that the population is larger and more people have health insurance. This will lead to more people being diagnosed. If you've been on this forum long enough you'll see that people come here seasonally, mostly in the fall and spring after their diagnoses.

We've had the same ability to monitor since the 1970's. All people with UC end up in the emergency room if their condition is overlooked long enough, health insurance or not. It's not really a factor in the epidemiological research. I've read many reports and the health insurance factor is never mentioned.

Same ability?? My OLED TV's are much better are much better than 1970 TV screens; I can see the difference with my own eyes.

They didn't have genetic tests in the 70's either. Testing is much better now.

My parents think that my grandmother had UC but was never diagnosed with it.

When I look at myself when I was diagnosed:

23 years old male
healthy - rarely on medicine
never overly stressed
no family history
i did live in a major city where the air quality was probably poor

so based on that, i along with most people here, lived a pretty normal life prior to being diagnosed. so i guess the question is whether this disease has been inside of us for years, maybe even since birth, and it just took all of those years to show up, or if the disease just came about when we started having symptoms.

the next question is whether we were exposed to something that caused this illness or if everyone is exposed to it and most people's immune system can withstand it.

based on my reasoning and the general thought on this board, UC is caused by:

1. Some type of bacteria in our colon that causes the immune system to inflame the colon.
2. The immune system is improperly inflaming the colon despite no type of bacteria in the colon.

I guess my main confusion is for something like FMT treatment, i dont understand how it can work with some people but not everyone. i understand it tends to help more people than it doesnt help, but if the cause of UC was #1, wouldnt an FMT help?

too many questions. i think a medication that can cause long term remission for a large % of UC patients is more likely than a cure... but i'm sure a lot of people said the same about a polio vaccine and countless other diseases.

Connor77 said...
The genetics you're referring to about UC are dubious. There have been studies on twins who both have the same UC genes while only one develops UC, or neither, or both. There is no discernible pattern. There are also people who don't have these genetics at all who develop IBD. I think the genetic argument is weak, in that regard. You have whole families developing UC and Crohn's and it's assumed that it's because of genetics when really there is more likely an environmental or pathogenic explanation.

Studies on twins have shown that if one has IBD, the chances of the other developing IBD are higher than they are for other family members.

Connor77 said...
To the second part, the clinical cases are what I'm talking about. There are surely a lot of people in the world with UC, right now, who will never be diagnosed because they never have symptoms that disable their day to day functions. They have histological changes that don't affect them. Patients come forth when they are concerned, i.e. have clinical presentation, or there is an emergent situation.

The rate of CLINICAL cases has increased drastically in the past decades. The subclinical cases are irrelevant because we have no way to judge them.

How do you *know* that there are "surely a lot of people in the world with UC, right now, who will....?" What evidence do you have that there are "a lot" of people with UC so mild it never causes symptoms?

Hi Conner77.
Are you still on the anti-MAP antibiotics? How are you doing? I hope ou don't mind my asking because it is soo interesting to hear how you are responding to the antibiotics as an UC patient.
Cheers