| Followers | 35 |
| Posts | 1202 |
| Boards Moderated | 1 |
| Alias Born | 08/27/2000 |
Thursday, September 04, 2014 1:56:10 AM
Now I am thinking of the difference between natural dying cells where PS targeting does not interfere with so it must not be "negatively charged"... right? maybe so ???
Well, I've had my binding theory and was laughed at when I called it "Interuption of molecular anionic binding" Even though it was all based on something real and true (Bioelectromagnetics),bioelectricphysiology ect..
Now ironically there's a field of study focused on just that, and phosphatidylserine is right in the middle of all of it..
Here's some confirmation, and a taste of bioelectrophysiology..
These nanopores allow transmembrane movement of molecules smaller than 300 D (Andre et al., 2010; Pakhomov et al., 2009) as well as a flow of the membrane lipid, phosphatidylserine (PS), from the inner to the outer membrane leaflet (Vernier et al., 2004). The ion flow across the organelle membranes results in an immediate transient mild elevation of intracellular Ca2+, and this is followed by a cascade involving nuclear pyknosis, DNA fragmentation and caspase activation (Schoenbach, 2010; Schoenbach et al., 2006). The PS externalization may be part of the signal that stimulates macrophages to phagocytose the tumor cells (Krysko et al., 2006).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3760242/?report=reader#!po=2.27273
All the best,
John
Disclaimer: Every post, and all my views are only speculative. Do not invest money or any other resources based on these post or opinions. Best of luck and do your own due diligence!
