Kingly protection for a peasant stomach

By Sandy Miller Hays
Posted 1/10/10

Queen Elizabeth I of England was, to put it mildly, a wonder.

Not only did she reign over England for 45 years, longer than the typical human life expectancy of the 1500s, but she was a veritable fount of memorable quotes, from “If I were …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Subscribe to continue reading. Already a subscriber? Sign in

Local reporters keeping you informed across the Alabama Gulf Coast.

You can cancel anytime.
 

Please log in to continue

Log in

Kingly protection for a peasant stomach

Posted

Queen Elizabeth I of England was, to put it mildly, a wonder.

Not only did she reign over England for 45 years, longer than the typical human life expectancy of the 1500s, but she was a veritable fount of memorable quotes, from “If I were turned out of my realm in my petticoat, I would prosper anywhere in Christendom” to “I have no desire to make windows into men’s souls.”

But the one that always sticks in my mind is her charge to her troops at Tilbury in 1588, as they awaited the arrival of the Spanish Armada: “I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king.”

I’ve never harbored any desire for a crown (I believe it was the current Queen of England’s father who said there are few experiences more miserable than balancing several pounds of metal on your head while reading someone else’s speech), but I’d sure love to have the stomach of a king. I don’t have to actually come into contact with, say, salmonella or e. coli; just show me a drawing of a foodborne bug and I’m down for three days.

So you can imagine my interest when I heard recently about a new test developed by Agricultural Research Service scientists that can detect levels of the dreaded staphylococcal enterotoxin A, or SEA, at levels that are an incredible 1 billion times lower than the current Agold standard test.

SEA is no minor player in the world of food poisoning; it’s a leading cause of foodborne illness not only in the United States, but worldwide.

To help public health officials trace the source of food poisoning outbreaks where they suspect SEA is the culprit, and to help food manufacturers go a bit further in ensuring the safety of their products, the ARS scientists came up with the new test for finding this toxin in foods. Their experiments with chicken, beef and milk indicate that the test can reliably tell the difference between active versus inactive toxins.

The test takes advantage of the toxins “double life.” Yes, SEA causes nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and other gastroenteritis symptoms. But it also acts as a “super-antigen,” which is to say that it stirs to action large numbers of immune system cells (which sounds nonsensical, but who ever said Mother Nature didn’t have a sense of humor?). The new test plays on this quirk by measuring the proliferation of splenocytes, which are immune system cells produced in the spleen.

Now, if this new test is so incredibly sensitive and effective, it’s got to be incredibly expensive and time-consuming, right? Wrong! It’s actually comparatively fast and relatively inexpensive, and experienced lab technicians can learn how to do it using equipment that’s already sitting in most analytical labs in the United States.

This isn’t the first time in recent months that ARS scientists have stepped forward with a new test to protect us against nasty invaders in our food.

Earlier this year, ARS scientists in California announced they’d developed a new, improved test for detecting serotype A of the botulinum toxin.

The toxin that causes botulism comes in seven different serotypes, from A to G. But most of the foodborne botulism cases that do occur in this country can be traced to either serotype A or serotype B. The traditional “gold standard” test for detecting botulinum toxin requires laboratory mice, takes at least four days to complete, and it’s neither portable nor inexpensive.

But ARS scientists came up with a way to use laboratory-built molecules called monoclonal antibodies to bind to the toxin. The idea of using monoclonal antibodies isn’t new, but the ones from the ARS scientists may be the most sensitive ones to date, capable of detecting the toxin in minuscule amounts. In fact, the ARS test is 10 times more sensitive than the mouse, it’s easier to use, it costs less — and the mice are considerably happier, too.

It sounds to me like, thanks to these ARS scientists, my peasant-model stomach is well on its way to getting protection fit for a king!

The Agricultural Research Service is the chief in house scientific research agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

You can read more about ARS discoveries at http://www.ars.usda.gov/news.