Talk:Autoimmunity

Ambiguous wording
I'm not sure if this is just me, but this part of the introduction seems confusing and obscure:

"The misconception that an individual's immune system is totally incapable of recognizing self antigens is not new. Paul Ehrlich, at the beginning of the twentieth century, proposed the concept of horror autotoxicus, wherein a 'normal' body does not mount an immune response against its own tissues."

I don't really understand this. Can someone clarify what it means? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.3.102 (talk) 17:43, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed - to provide unreferenced and argumentative debate about what autoimmunity is NOT doesn't constitute an adequate introduction. Could someone who is knowledgable about the field please expound more about the boundaries of the topic itself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.91.106.141 (talk) 09:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't get it either. Firstly, the sentence is triple negated: misconception, incapable, is not new'. Secondly, the expression capable of recognizing self antigens appears unclear to me. Recognizing them in order to attack them or in order not to attack them? Thirdly, it is also bad that this is an argumentative statement . I'll try to change the wording so it will at least appear more clearly, but later, we should edit it more throughly. --Sasper (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Amin Jenna Deep Explore
— Assignment last updated by JMR2024 (talk) 18:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)