Talk:Pertussis toxin

Untitled
With regard to the mechanism of action of the pertussis toxin, I believe that the statement that 'since the G alpha subunits remain in their GDP bound, inactive state, they are unable to inhibit adenylyl cyclase, thus keeping levels of adenylyl cyclase and cAMP elevated' is not wholly correct. From my understanding, purtussis toxin alters the G (alpha i) subunit so that GDP can not be replaced by GTP. Since this keeps it in its inactive state activation of adenylyl cyclase is impossible and hence cAMP concentration in the cell will fall (not be elevated)
 * "Not activation, but inhibition of adenylyl cyclase is impossible...", interesting though that the cholera toxin locks an αs(stimulatory) subunit in the active state, while the pertussis toxin locks an αi(inhibitory) subunit in the inactive state, essentially leading both to increases in cAMP... Any source for confirming that this is correct?--77.57.195.215 (talk) 18:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

What is considered a normal result for the B. pertussis IgG Antibody test in a 43 yr old adult female vaccinated as a child??

If you are vaccinated against a disease this implies that you have created the antibody for the disease. Therefore a vaccinated adult should expect a positive result in a pertussis toxin immunoassay.

Anon data dump Possibly useful info moved to talk page
(moved by MarcoTolo 04:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)).


 * (note added after text restore) I moved this info from the main article space to the talk page not to disregard it, but to give us (the inclusive, all-Wikipedia us) a chance to digest it. There is some potentially useful material here folks, it will just take a little time to sort through it all. -- MarcoTolo 22:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Editor:
 * I have taken your advice and created an account. I was not offended by the term you used--it was accurate.  Rather, I removed what I wrote because it is an exact transcription of a paper I completed for school and, upon second thought, I didn't want it to be open on the internet.  I would be happy to try and edit this page in a more satisfactory way over my spring break (next week), though I do ask that you allow me to remove the paper as is for fear of not being able to claim credit for my work in the future.  If you deny this request I understand, this is a lot of information to potentially lose to a (previously) anonymous editor.  Thank you. -- Unsigned comment left by MhTEX on (21:49, 15 March 2007).


 * I'm glad to hear that you were not offended and that you have elected to get an account&mdash;I suspect you have much to offer Wikipedia. In addition, while the info you uploaded technically remains a part of Wikipedia, I can understand your change of heart in adding it en masse to the encyclopedia. (As an aside, one could also argue that by uploading your paper you hae established a level of "priority" of a sort....).


 * In any case, I'm glad to see you back. -- MarcoTolo 19:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Note to the anonymous editor who contributed the above

 * Since you came in on multiple IPs I can't leave a message on all your talk pages, so I'm trying here on the chance you'll catch this: 1. Thanks for the contribution; 2. Please help us integrate as appropriate back in the main article; 3. I suspect I may have inadvertently offended you with the phrase "Anon data dump"&mdash;I did not intend to use the phrase in a pejorative manner simply a descriptive one&mdash;my apologies; 4. Please consider getting a Wikipedia account&mdash;I'd like to see you continue editing here. -- MarcoTolo 22:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)