Grape Poisoning- What in the World???

Grape Poisoning- What in the World???

I find this topic fascinating. The first time I heard this reported, I said "What???" just like the rest of you. "I have been feeding my dogs grapes for years without incidence" I said. "Why would something that has so many health benefits in people (minus the pesticide residues) cause so much trouble in dogs?" I guess many would leave that question unanswered or be content with the list of possible explanations and simply stop feeding grapes to dogs. Buuuut, after 5 years of pretty intense medical research, studying everything from Alzheimer's to Zinc deficiency, I had to give it my best shot.

And here it is- First of all, what do we know? Hmmm... We know that there have been very few reported cases. There have probably been more but were just written off as something else like antifreeze intoxication or immune glomerulonephritis (more on that in a minute). We also know that the dose of the raisins or grapes ranged from a large quantity to a quite small amount. This is a big key. This makes poisoning very unlikely. And if it were a poison, they would have been able to ID this most likely. Plus, most pesticides affect the liver not the kidneys. The KIDNEYS are the target organ- another key fact.

What is one of the most common causes of death of (older) dogs and cats? Kidney failure. What is the most common cause of kidney failure? (Chronic) immune glomerulonephritis. What is the cause of immune glomerulonephritis? Ahhh, now there is where it gets interesting. Most would say that it is "idiopathic" (just like we have to label his grape thing as being right now, interestingly.). Unfortunately, the consensus of opinion is that this "idiopathic" form of kidney failure is an "autoimmune" disorder, in which the immune system goes "haywire" and attacks the body's tissues for no reason. "Its a genetic thing" is what is often said.

I contend that the body does not make that kind of "mistake"...ever. The immune system never attacks the body "for no reason". There is something IN that tissue that it doesn't like...some foreign protein that has taken up residence in that tissue. What would be there? The usual suspects...viruses, mycoplasma, food proteins (lectins- http://www.krispin.com/lectin.html ), bacteria, yeast, and others. Actually, This has been suspected to be the case for years.

Viruses are KNOWN to inhabit many of our tissues, laying dormant for years, sometimes lifetimes, just waiting for their opportunity to pop up and cause trouble. Great examples are Herpes, shingles, and even AIDS (How long has Magic Johnson been HIV positive now?). Many cancers are known to be viral now. When did we acquire these guys? Could some of them have been there since birth, even transmitted from mother to offspring? We know that this happens, too. Could this explain "genetic" cancers? Why do so many immune-related disorders have remitting/relapsing symptoms? Sounds sort of like a Herpes virus infection, doesn't it?

Did you know that plants contain viruses? Have you looked into what GMO's really are? (Oh oh).

The fact is that viruses are ubiquitous in nature. A single teaspoon of sea water contains over a billion viruses. Viruses are ESSENTIAL in nature, being responsible for adaptation by living things and variation in nature. Viruses mutate and adapt. (Do genes really mutate??? Great question. We know something that does for sure, don't we? Do viruses ever incorporate their genetic material into ours? Of course. That IS what they do.)

In the cat, there is a viral condition known as FIP. What an interesting condition. It starts with the cat contracting the FIP virus (a corona virus). The infection is usually either inapparent or a mild upper respiratory infection that the cat quickly suppresses. BUT, the virus sometimes disseminates (spreads) throughout the body, setting up housekeeping in various tissues (liver, kidneys, brain, eyes, lining of the chest/abdomen, etc). THEN, upon subsequent exposure to the virus again... OR an FIP-LIKE virus (very important here!!!)...the immune response to the new virus spills over into the tissue where the original virus is located and the immune system attacks that tissue with the old virus in it. This is the KNOWN mechanism for FIP, with the symtoms arising from the immune response to the virus in the tissue and the subsequent death of some of that tissue. Wow! What a great example of "autoimmunity". Sounds sort of like "friendly fire", doesn't it?

So you probably see where I am going with this now. WHAT IF the grapes raisins contain a VIRUS...a plant virus...that is similar to the one already in the kidneys of the dog that eats those grapes/raisins? Afterall, many dogs are bound to have viruses in their kidneys already. (Researchers KNOW they are there, just as they are in the brain, liver, and other tissues.) And we now know from conditions like FIP that one of the mechanisms of immune-mediated disease is re-exposure to a virus (or vaccine. Oh oh, again) with the cascade of events described above taking place.

So, I could easily believe that the grape "poisoning" is an acute, immune-mediated reaction to a plant virus that resembles one already in the kidney of the affected dog. That would explain much, wouldn't it? It would explain the low incidence, the low dose of grapes/raisins required, the rapid course (how long does it take to have an immune response to something?), and the fact that all tests have failed to identify the culprit. Viruses can be hard to identify and isolate, can't they? If they weren't , we would have a much better handle on our "idiopathic" immune-mediated diseases for one thing.

Why do I find this "fascinating"? Because I see the real danger in GMO's as do many knowledgeable scientists. And they are doing some crazy things with new genetics technology, crossing deep water halibut genes with tomatoes to make them last longer in the refrigerator. It is a sort of "Island of Dr. Moreaux" sort of thing. (You may need to look that one up. :) ) As I tell people, "Hey,I saw Alien 3-The Resurrection. I know how sci-fi experiments can go very badly". When did we think we could mess with Nature this way???

Food for thought, eh?

Dogtor J

Addendum

My study of fluoride revealed that grapes and raisins are incredibly high in this potentially toxic element. Could the high fluoride content of grapes and their wrinkled siblings be the cause of the kidney failure in dogs that ingest them? If so, what is the true mechanism for that renal failure? What makes something "toxic" to one individual and not to another?

These are the kinds of questions I have started asking while trying to uncover the truth about medicine. We have taken a lot for granted or at least been satisfied with rather superficial explanations for some medical occurrences. Toxicity is one such topic. "Hey, it's toxic. What more do you need to know?" one might ask.

Well, the study of autism and the attempts made to unravel the true causes versus the triggers has put me into a diagnostic mode that I never used to employ. Questions like "If the vaccines are the cause of autism, then why don't all individuals who receive the vaccine develop autism?" are great examples of very valid questions with surprisingly good answers. As it turns out, vaccines are both causes and triggers depending on which element of the vaccine being discussed but there are deeper factors (e.g. food intolerance) that have set the autistic child up for this horrific reaction to a vaccine that is tossed off by the "normal" child. Some of today's children- the offspring of the fast food generation- are simply too unhealthy to take on a vaccine loaded with man-engineered modified live viruses, adjuvants and mercury (thimersol).

I believe the same is true with the reaction to fluoride. Fluoride is a highly toxic, cumulative toxin- similar to mercury in those regards. Fluoride is a known carcinogen and trigger of "autoimmune disease". Now that we better understand the role of viruses and intracellular bacteria in these processes, we should be able to imagine how fluoride could serve to stimulate these hidden entities into action.

In cancer, we have to have three things come together to produce the undesirable outcome: The viruses that cause cancer, the carcinogens that cause the viruses to cause cancer, and some degree of immune failure that allows the process to get out of control. We all have viruses in our body that are capable of causing cancer. and we all are being bombarded by carcinogens through our diet and environments. So, why do we now all develop cancer early in life? Because we have not yet exceeded the tolerance level of that particular tissue (I contend, set by the intracellular viruses and bacteria within that cell) and, up to that point, we have a healthy immune system that is keeping that cell from growing out of control even when that tolerance level is exceeded. But, exceed that threshold and damage your immune system...look out.

It is clear that our body hates mercury and fluoride, two of the most toxic elements known to man. But what, again, determines when an individual will suffer a toxic reaction and what the manifestation will be? Certainly, the reaction is greatly dose dependent. We have established the LD50 (lethal dose) for many such chemicals but even then, that designation is the median toxic dose and the amount required to kill 50% of the exposed population. If it kills 50%, why does it not kill the others? To me, that is a most interesting question and the crux of the matter.

Some individuals are more tolerant of toxic insults than others. What determines this tolerance- "genetics", luck, or defined entities within the cells? Why does an individual's tolerance for allergens typically go down over time, resulting in their becoming "horribly allergic" to something such as cat dander or pollens?

The cool thing to see is that there are living organisms residing in our cells- viruses and intracellular bacteria- whose main characteristic is their ability to adapt. And, they are in our cells to help that tissue adapt. Many of the symptoms we experience is that adaptive process. And as the saying goes, "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger." How does one develop a tolerance for drugs, alcohol and even toxins (e.g. rattlesnake venom)? Through gradual exposure and adaptation.

As I've discussed in other papers, cancer is the ultimate adaption of viruses and intracellular bacteria. These two entities work in concert to decide when it is time for the cell to divide, how rapidly it will divide and what that cell will turn into. We also know that cancer is the "end game" of autoimmune diseases", meaning that cancer arises in areas of chronic inflammation and that most cancer is preceded by some manifestation of long-term immune-mediated disease.

We have known for years that cancer is viral. We have just come to grips with the role of intracellular bacteria in cancer, as they exchange their nuclear material with that of the mitochondria of the cell. And we are finally seeing the role that both of these tiny entities play in "autoimmune" diseases. Many individuals with the latter are being helped with specific antibiotics such as doxycycline, minocycline, and azithromycin known for their ability to control mycoplasma and L-form bacteria.

But, there is another group of drugs that also kills these particular bacteria called the fluoroquinolones (Levaquin, Baytril, Zeniquin). These are fluoride-based antibiotics, with fluoride being a powerful antibacterial. But, when you look up the side effects of these fluoroquinolones, they read like a who's who of autoimmune diseases, similar to the old sulfur-based drugs to which many are intolerant. In fact, there are Websites out there that are determined to have fluoroquinolones banned from the shelves due to the havoc these drugs wreaked on them or a family member.

How can a drug that kills bacteria so effectively in some individuals cause such serious "autoimmune disease" (which involves viruses and bacteria) in others? Uh, "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger"??? I can easily see how the internal residents of the cell could react violently to the presence of the fluoride (or sulfur). After all, those bacteria living inside the cell are not killed by the antibiotic. Only those outside the cell are killed. And those mycoplasma that are killed quickly by an antibiotic can release a toxin that results in a major reaction called the Herxheimer Reaction, that can generate a myriad of symptoms.

So, what are the chances that the fluoride in the grapes and raisins are actually stimulating a reaction by viruses and/or intracellular bacteria inside the cells of the kidney of those who ingest them? Could that be the true origin of this uncommon reaction to eating grapes and raisins? Is it a "perfect storm" situation like the autism epidemic in which multiple factors have to come together in order to produce the negative effect? Does one have to occupied by the right (or wrong) microorganisms in order the have a toxic reaction? Did the fluoride (and/or plant viruses) that the grapes and raisins contained simply push those individuals over the edge, causing them to have the renal failure that they were destined to have later done the road?

I don't have the definitive answers to all of these questions but at least I have you thinking, right?

John