Question

Dr. Whitmanburger is the world famous scientist who has been chasing down the dangerous pathogen, Sportious agentious, which infects and can cause the feared “corruption syndrome” within student athletes. Recently, Dr. Whitmanburger suspects that one of the student athletes at the University of Illinois has been infected with S. agentious. To confirm this suspicion, Dr. Whitmanburger collects and tests a blood sample from the student athlete using his enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay against the S. agentious important virulence factor, MonE. The test results come back positive, indicating that antibodies against MonE were circulating in the bloodstream of the student athlete. From these data, Whitmanburger concludes that the student athlete had contracted corruption syndrome from being infected with S. agentious. Briefly discuss why Dr. Whitmanburger’s conclusion, which is based solely the results from his enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay, may in fact, NOT be correct.

Answer 1

The conclusion made by Dr. Whitmanburger is solely based on results by the immunoadsorbent assay where it is found that there is high circulation of antibodies against the virulence factor, MonE. The conclusion can be wrong because the presence of the antibodies might also be due to increase in the infectious agents in the blood circulation apart from the infection caused the sportious agentious. Sometimes the production of the antibodies is also due to formation of antibodies against self cells in the process of autoantibody production. The assay is conducted only for the virulence factor MonE and the presence of antibodies does not confirm presence of MonE as the antibodies can be formed due to even other factors. The assay is generally used for measuring antibodies, antigens, proteins etc. but it does not specifically show what antibodies are produced against what and if there are other infectious agents responsible for causing increased antibody production.