Immune response: Self-foreignness

The classical basic concept of the immune system as a defence system per se and immunological surveillance against neoplasia have never been satisfactorily verified experimentally. The reason for this lies in the historic development of immunology interms of observations of infectious disease and the interpretation of those observations. Thus, based on a complete lack of understanding of immune events, immunization procedures were developed by Pasteur and his contemporaries. The success of some of these immunization methods, influenced by culture and philosophical thoughts, and based on prima facie evidence allowed the next conceptual step to be taken, culminating in the immune surveillance hypothesis. Central to this hypothesis is selection and tolerance to self-antigens. However, immune reactions to self-antigens are evident and clonal selection is not viable because the number of clones required increases as the frequency of chance of a cell belonging to a particular clone decreases. Also, circadian rhythms in the immune response have not been taken into account. In addition, the problems of haemocytopoiesis have not been addressed, in that it is possible for B-lymphocytes to become terminal macrophages and T-lymphocytes to become mast cells, eosinophils and/or basophils constituting ‘dead end’ cells in an immune response. The initiation of the immune response begins with a tissue-specific T-lymphocyte being stimulated and undergoes replication. This gives rise to a dual functional helper/suppressor cell and a B-lymphocyte. These basic concepts explain the necessity for auto-reactive lymphocytes, that is the autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction (AMR). The AMR is a natural consequence of having tissue-specific lymphocytes to monitor plasma membrane aberrations.