Sarcoidosis

[k4843mkd]

I have read a few articles describing similarities between sarcoidosis and tuberculosis. If tuberculosis is considered to be caused by a bacteria and often treated with several antibiotics, why is sarcoidosis not treated with antibiotics (except for the Marshall Protocol which is not accepted by most pulmonologists)? Does anyone know of any threatment options other than the traditional prednisone approach and the Marshall Protocol? And in particular, any antibiotic approaches that are acceptable to most pulmonologists?

[Davy9]

The bacterial organism that causes TB is clearly understood, diagnosed and treatment approaches exist which are also understood.

An infectious origin to sarcoid is being explored. If it does turn out to be related to an infectious organism that organism will not at all be similar to the one which causes TB.

The Marshall Protocol is apparently a serious endeavor to understanding an infectious origin for and treatment for sarcoid and other diseases. I am not familiar enough with it to advocate its application. I would think that well designed medical research could validate or refute its premise. Still I am unaware of any research that enforces or dismisses the Marshal Protocol.

From the standpoint of infectious disease there is an existing human disease model which does provide some important information in this regard. Full blown AIDS leaves the body quite susceptible to a wide range of processes including infectious diseases easily managed in healthy people. But the incidence of sarcoid is no different among the AIDS population. If sarcoid was infectious one should see more of it (and more aggressive cases) in AIDS patients and in other immuno-compromised individuals but that does not happen.

Sarcoid is far more prevalent among blacks and nobody knows why. This clear racial disparity does not readily lend itself to an infectious origin. You would have to assume that blacks are more susceptible to this unknown infectious organism. Still that is possible.

But medical science does not know it all and as of yet the Marshall Protocol has not been debunked or proven. But, the answer to your question is certain. TB has a clearly understood etiology whereas sarcoid does not (as yet). So TB gets treatment shown to work while sarcoid gets treated palliatively.

Understand also that commonly accepted medical practices do not evolve haphazardly. Until a treatment approach is proven to work safely, with reproducible results and a calculated protocol it will not become routinely used. This is what medical research delivers, the clear understanding of how to treat, what doses to prescribe, what results to expect, what complications may arise and how to monitor the relative progress or failure of the application. At some juncture maybe Marshall's work will lead to this, maybe not. Until then Marshall's work will remain in the research arena. There it will be studied and even perhaps refined until it can safely enter everyday medical practice. Or, there it will be found unreliable and impractical and maybe even dangerous.

In the interim those with sarcoid will be sorely tempted to seek out any approach with any degree of potential success. Feel free to explore the Marshall Protocol further but proceed with caution and a degree of skepticism. If it really works then it should really work well for most subjects.

[k4843mkd]

Thank you for answering my question so thoughtfully and thoroughly. I am nervous about trying something as unaccepted by the medical community as the Marshall Protocol, so I will probably go the prednisone route if my symptoms continue to control my life. Unfortunately It doesn't seem that much research is being done, despite a growing number of sarcoidosis cases, as AIDS or Parkinson's or cancer, etc., so I have little hope that anything else will become available in the near future. Perhaps it is because sarcoidosis does sometimes go away on its own--or because its progression is very slow--or maybe even because there is just no prominent spokesperson for the disease. But, it can be debilitating. Palliative measures just aren't enough. I am trying to become stronger and healthier in the hopes that my body will somehow settle itself down and rebalance itself or whatever bodies do or at least strengthen itself against other infections and problems.

Thank you again, very much, for taking the time to answer my question! P.S. Northern Europeans are also a higher risk group---I'm a blue-eyed blond---and in spite of the "normal" age group being 20-40, I am 61. Just lucky, I guess.