Inside the Book:
Title: The Prevention of Crohn's Disease
Author: Gilles R.G. Monif, M.D.
Publisher: AuthorHouse
Genre: Health
Format: Ebook
Prior to 1936, Crohn’s disease was a rare and unrecognized disease entity. Today, the United States is the midst of a rapidly growing epidemic. It is estimated that between 800,000 and 1.2 million citizens are currently afflicted. The unanswered question is WHY? In the 1990s, circumstantial scientific data inferred a potential causal relationship between Crohn’s disease in humans and mycobacterial pathogen in domestic animals, Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP). When it was documented that MAP survived pasteurization and was potentially present in milk, infant formula, and powdered milk, a global precautionary alarm button should have been pushed by those who govern in the public trust.
PREVENTION OF CROHN’S DISEASE describes MAP’s journey across the zoonotic bridge between animals and humans and the unique circumstances by which it allegedly produces disease.
ORDER INFORMATION
The Prevention of Crohn's Disease is available for order at
The postulate that
MAP could be the possible causative agent for Crohn’s disease had been in play
for a decade before Congress move to fund research meant to determine whether
or not this zoonotic mycobacterium constituted a threat to the public welfare.
The fact that the destructive process was immune mediated constituted a
formidable problem. The disease in cattle (Johne’s disease) and the diarrhea
induced in immunocompromised individual are the consequence of organism/hosts
interactions and not immune mediated. To
make MAP the cause of Crohn’s disease was very much the problem of a square peg
confronted with a round hole. The circumstantial evidence that a relationship
existed was too strong to abandon the MAP paradigm of causation.
Whether square peg
could be made to fit was destroyed when Congress gave the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) stewardship of determining the risk of MAP in milk and milk
products to the public health. In contrast to the National Institutes of Health
and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USDA lacked the
infrastructure to research a human disease entity. USDA’s stated
objective is promotion and advancement of agribusiness . In 1996, when
it was documented that MAP in milk survived pasteurization, USDA produced a
publication that falsely asserted that pasteurization done in the United States
did destroy MAP, Even though this paper was quickly discredited, the Food and
Drug Administration cited this work in support of awarding control of research funding to USDA. By so
doing , Congress put the fox in charge of the hen house, but then locked it
inside. The way to deal within an uncomfortable problem is to study it. That is
precisely what USDA did . Using the rational, that the way to address the
problem was to eradicate MAP within infected herds and to preclude its
dissemination to uninfected herds. USDA initiated a volunteer demonstration
dairy herd program and little else , The net result of USDA’s has been
widespread dissemination of MAP among milk-producing animals and increased
adulteration MAP of the food supply.
By warehousing the
urgency of the problem and diverting research from medical to veterinary
medicine, USDA effectively undermined Congress’ mandate for information that
could form the basis for policy.
MAP is a very real
problem for producers. MAP-infected animals produce less milk. Have lower
slaughter weight, and somewhat poorer reproductive outcomes Control of MAP in
the production area would be of benefit to producers, but too do so could have
had negative consequence for those who use milk in manufacturing of selected
food substances.
Meet the Author:
