Why the 3rd through 5th decades of life?

[Kim]

Hi ekreuger,

Have you read the Testimonials in the “Home” section of the board?  If not, you will find them inspiring.

Take care….kim

[Lynne G.SD]

Hi EK;
     What is your real name and what disease do you have.Could you put a wee bit of info on your “profile”I don't get to the computer very often and when I do it is only for a few moments so I am not up to date on everybody.
    I have been in remission for the last 6 years or so but it was tough going.I did not have a clue that I had Celiac and that stopped AP from working.It had caused multiple food sensitivities and systemic yeast.Adding a bunch of antibiotics sure did not help the yeast issue,it just got worse despite a ton of probiotics.I have a very astute doctor that figured it out in no time but it took about 18 months to reverse the celiac damage and then only an other year and a bit to get to remission.
    My doctor has a very high rate of CURES to her name and wonders if I might have Lyme also as I still have to take some antibiotics or the SD tries to sneek in the back door.Going to figure this out eventually.The only sighn left of SD is ridged nails and tight cuticles.

[A Friend]

[user=1992]ekrueger[/user] wrote:

Hi all,

I've been doing a lot of reading and thinking and I have a question. If mycoplasma are responsible for the onset of RA and other rheumatic diseeases, then why does it usually choose the 3rd through 5th decades of life, or the “childbearing years” to rear its ugly head? Why not in childhood when kids are all inhaling each others germs (though I know it does happen in childhood sometimes hence JRA). Not that I am doubting the whole infectious theory or anything. I'm just trying to make sense of it in my own mind. Any thoughts or science-backed answers would be appreciated.

Thank you!

ekrueger

 

ekrueger,

So much has been posted on this thread on this subject — and I don't have the luxury of time to read all of it, but have skimmed over much. 

Another strong belief on why young women develop post-partum debilitating problems is that these women may have already been under a very stressful situation for some time before having a new baby.  Post partum problems also happen after a woman has had previous children, thus adding a heavy load in addition to the present pregnancy/delivery. 

A woman's body and mental stress does not end with the delivery, but can result in continuing  responsibilities PLUS new ones with the new baby, loss of sleep, perhaps increased financial worries, etc., etc., etc. 

Also, during pregnancy while the baby is being formed and nutured readying it for birth, if there are not enough nutrients for the baby, the body will drain these from the mother's body for the baby.  If she were already deficient in nutrients, and already suffering from lots of stress, tiredness, etc., this could leave her even more vulnerable to the maladies. PLUS, AS OTHERS HAVE POSTED, the hormones are in a state of flux after delivery, just when she and her health will be called upon for further stress and loss of sleep on her body.  (Women used to actually stay in hospital a week after childbirth, PLUS live nearer relatives who were accessible to help, PLUS more women used to be stay-at-home moms.) 

In the above situation, after multiple birth fairly close together, the mother's body may well run out of resilience, and does not have the nutrients to sustain her, and without these different body functions can begin to fail.  And the different organs and systems of the body are all connected. 

I've known about a year-long postpartum situation where a knowledgeable OB/GYN actually put a patient on the strongest birth-control med (not for birth control, but to regulate the hormones), and soon the year-long acute situation was reversed.  I was impressed and thrilled for this young mother who had several children in about 4 or 5 years.  (Having lived very near this young woman, it seemed like a miracle.)

And, one more thing, in the reading I've done in the Mildred Seelig online book, “Magnesium Deficiency in the Pathogenesis of Disease,” there are many findings/reports about things that can have happened to us/babies in utero, and some susceptibilities we have are acquired during this period of time…. plus genetic predisposition. 

AF  

[Margaret Mueller]

About ten years ago, I was following some articles about heart disease and a link to bacterial infections — way, way before I got sd.

I remember the researcher saying that his theory was that many of these diseases do what so many do in nature: they allow the host to reproduce and then attack the host.

The question is, why wait to the third to fifth decade, but you have to remember that it has only been the last one hundred or so years that women waited past 18 to have their first child — most women around the world were mothers before they were sixteen. Our bodies are prepared biologically to reproduce in our early to mid-teens, it is our culture which has developed the bias toward delaying reproduction (with good reason) — which works fairly well in our contemporary society (and I mean 'fairly' well because I have had a high percentage of friends and family who in their late twenties either could not conceive or were put on bed rest and drugs half way through their pregnancy).

From my perspective, the bacteria is delaying it's attack until it — an organism which is billions of years old — perceives that the reproductive years are over — even at 18 or 19, because that is 'historically' the upper end of child-bearing for humanity for hundreds of thousands of years. We need to adjust our idea of what child-bearing years are to understand why the organism attacks when it does. The bacteria hasn't forgotten what it is programmed to do.

For the record, I had my first son at 35, and my last at 41. My mother at 26 and 33, and my grandmother at 22 and 40. We're late bloomers in my matriarchal line as far back as I can go.

[A Friend]

[user=1323]Margaret Mueller[/user] wrote:

About ten years ago, I was following some articles about heart disease and a link to bacterial infections — way, way before I got sd.

I remember the researcher saying that his theory was that many of these diseases do what so many do in nature: they allow the host to reproduce and then attack the host.

The question is, why wait to the third to fifth decade, ……
From my perspective, the bacteria is delaying it's attack until it — an organism which is billions of years old — perceives that the reproductive years are over — even at 18 or 19, because that is 'historically' the upper end of child-bearing for humanity for hundreds of thousands of years. We need to adjust our idea of what child-bearing years are to understand why the organism attacks when it does. The bacteria hasn't forgotten what it is programmed to do……..

Margaret, your take on bacteria and their having “perception” in attacking life is interesting (and a bit scary), and I'm hoping this is not true.  My take (after reading a good bit on this subject at one time) has been that bacteria appear when there is something that they are designed to do to clean up infection, something that has gone very wrong, and even then they are trying to clean up what's wrong.  If the body is able to keep itself running in a healthy condition, then my thinking (from what I've read) would be that they don't begin “doing away with us.”   

This is an interesting paper (I believe by a professor); and I've underlined and made bold a few statements.  It is from this site:

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2005-04/1114460899.Gb.r.html
[excerpts I've underscored and made bold…notice that acidosis thing re: lactic acid, appears again..af]
However, one of the by-products of anaerobic respiration is lactic acid.  Lactic acid eventually builds up and causes the muscles to stiffen.  This is the same thing that
happens to a person's legs when they run a long distance.  The heart and lungs can't keep up with the demand so the leg muscles start to use anaerobic respiration.  In a living person this lactic acid will eventually be cleared out by the circulatory system, but in a dead body this isn't possible so the entire body stiffens.  This is called rigor mortis.  Rigor mortis usually starts about 3 hours after death and lasts 36 hours.  Eventually all of the cells die and the body can no longer fight [off] bacteria.  [end of excerpt from this link]

And on the other hand, the following site/article may add credence to what you wrote: [none of these are happy thoughts, but perhaps part of our education]

http://science.jrank.org/pages/1320/Cell-Death.html

AF

 

[Davit]

My take on this is a whole lot simpler.

It is a war of attrition with a few terrorists thrown in for fun. Your Immune system can only call up so many soldiers and it takes time to mobilize them.

So you have on one side of the line Immune soldiers and on the other side Bacteria. In a healthy body the immune side has more soldiers.

Now throw in the terrorists to occupy the immune soldiers. Parturition, diabetes, Lyme, Broken bones, Ruptured spleen,(my case) or what have you.

So while your immune soldiers are dealing with the terrorists. The very mobile bacteria are mobilizing into every nook and cranny. And with no opposition they grow.

This may explain why so many physically active people get hit. They tire themselves out too much. Just like your new mother. Or over worked mother.
And considering the average diet, I'm surprised we aren't all sick, or maybe we are.

Davit.

[Author]

Posts