Hi All
Last week I sent out information about Rosacea 'A Misunderstood Skin Condition Sweeping the Baby Boom Generation'
This has generated very interesting comments by Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy and Prof. Olle Johansson, that are copied below. I thank them both for the thoughtful information that they have provided us.
Martin Weatherall
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi Martin,
Just a comment about Dr Mercola's observation.
The "stratum corneum tryptic enzyme" looks as though it could be the main trigger for rosacea. The stratum corneum tryptic enzyme is a digestive enzyme and, as its name implies, is found in the stratum corneum, which is the dead outer layer of the skin. Presumably, it plays a part in digesting the contents of the dying cells.
However, the stratum corneum is separated from the living part of the skin (which contains the blood vessels) by the "stratum granulosum", which is a tight junction barrier similar to the blood-brain barrier. If the electromagnetic fields from cell phones etc. make this "skin barrier" leak in much the same way as it makes the blood-brain barrier leak, then it would allow this enzyme to enter the living part of the skin and trigger rosacea.
Best wishes
Andrew
(Dr Andrew Goldsworthy)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Martin,
Important message to be added to the one below:
Already in the 1980s it was shown that the rosacea-like skin conditions seen after using computer screens, and likewise, i.e. the first persons revealing what nowadays is renamed electrohypersensitivity, are NOT rosacea as described in clinicial dermatology. It was also shown that the skin cellular reactions seen under fluorescence microscopy employing indirect immunofluorescence techniques are completely
different from rosacea (as well as some other classical dermatological conditions). Furthermore, also profound alterations was observed in e.g. certain immune-competent cells as well as in the cutaneous mast cell population. Thus, it was early realized that, from a clinical dermatologcal
point of view, the EHS persons form a distinct and unique entity. If anything, the common denominator for these skin alterations points in only one direction: classical irradiation damage (as seen e.g. in victims exposed to radioactivity, X-rays, UV-light or radar beams --- and now to non-ionizing radiation from computer screens, mobile phones, DECT phones, WiFi, etc.?).
All of this has been very elegantly covered by Gunni Nordström in her series of truly cornerstone books, e.g. her fourth one "Nordström, G. (2004). The Invisible Disease—The Dangers of Environmental Illnesses caused by Electromagnetic Fields and
Chemical Emissions. Hants and New York: O Books". I strongly recommend them for reading as well as her very many articles, all of which of the highest quality.
Best regards
Yours
Olle
(Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
&
Professor
The Royal Institute of Technology
100 44 Stockholm
Sweden)
Important message to be added to the one below:
Already in the 1980s it was shown that the rosacea-like skin conditions seen after using computer screens, and likewise, i.e. the first persons revealing what nowadays is renamed electrohypersensitivity, are NOT rosacea as described in clinicial dermatology. It was also shown that the skin cellular reactions seen under fluorescence microscopy employing indirect immunofluorescence techniques are completely
different from rosacea (as well as some other classical dermatological conditions). Furthermore, also profound alterations was observed in e.g. certain immune-competent cells as well as in the cutaneous mast cell population. Thus, it was early realized that, from a clinical dermatologcal
point of view, the EHS persons form a distinct and unique entity. If anything, the common denominator for these skin alterations points in only one direction: classical irradiation damage (as seen e.g. in victims exposed to radioactivity, X-rays, UV-light or radar beams --- and now to non-ionizing radiation from computer screens, mobile phones, DECT phones, WiFi, etc.?).
All of this has been very elegantly covered by Gunni Nordström in her series of truly cornerstone books, e.g. her fourth one "Nordström, G. (2004). The Invisible Disease—The Dangers of Environmental Illnesses caused by Electromagnetic Fields and
Chemical Emissions. Hants and New York: O Books". I strongly recommend them for reading as well as her very many articles, all of which of the highest quality.
Best regards
Yours
Olle
(Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
&
Professor
The Royal Institute of Technology
100 44 Stockholm
Sweden)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear All,
Dear All,
I do not disagree with anything that Olle has said. There is more to the effects of electromagnetic radiation on the skin than just rosacea; rosacea may be just the tip of the iceberg.
We cannot explain all of the electromagnetically-induced skin disorders as being due to leakage of tight junction barriers any more than we can explain all of the neurological symptoms of the radiation in terms of effects on the blood-brain barrier.
Serious as these effects are, they are far from being the whole story. Almost our entire bodies seem to be affected in one way or another by non-ionising radiation. Olle is right to compare it with low doses of ionising radiation. Both induce membrane leakage and DNA damage, but the mechanisms are quite different. The high photon energies of ionising radiation generate free radicals, which initiate chain reactions that peroxidise polyunsaturated phospholipids and literally blast large holes in cell membranes.
Non-ionising radiation achieves the same effect by gently teasing out structurally important calcium ions so that the membrane becomes more inclined to develop temporary pores. In either case, cell membranes become permeable to macromolecules such as proteins and enzymes, which can then do further damage.
The leakage of DNase due to damage to lysosome membranes can account for much of the DNA destruction in higher organisms from both sorts of radiation. Bacteria do not have lysosomes and are typically about one thousand times more resistant to gamma rays than higher organisms, which suggests that lysosome damage may be an important factor, even with ionising of radiation. If this is the case, we can expect a great deal of collateral damage as other digestive enzymes leak from lysosomes, which can then give rise to a whole range of unwanted physiological symptoms. There are indeed many physiological symptoms from non-ionising radiation, but a surprisingly large number of them can be traced back to membrane leakage (see http://tinyurl.com/5ru6e6 for just a few)
Best wishes
Andrew
(Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original message sent by WEEP news
The story (linked) is about a facial skin condition - rosacea (pronounced roh-ZAY-sha). After reading the story I believe that electro magnetic radiation from cell phones and cordless telephones aggravates this disease and may have caused it to become so prevalent today.
It is not unusual to see cell phone users turning red as they are being exposed to microwave radiation. Sometimes it is the ears that become red, sometimes the forehead, the neck or the cheeks. EMR is not listed as a 'tripwire' for rosacea but there are good reasons that it should be and warnings given to sufferers.
Martin Weatherall
www.weepinitiative.org
