This is very long, but is a very interesting look at the culture wars and how they are essential to the cabal to control. Dr. Lida Mattman had the best culture, but no one will use it to my knowledge. She could find L-forms and many other forms, but most scientists use BSK, which this post mostly deals with. I also am having difficulty with trusting the contradictory stances of Dr. Zhang. Some of us discussed this in an earlier forum and I have since contacted him. Remember who he works for - one of the chief denialists Dr. Auwaerter - and be cautious about
the Johns Hopkins studies. It seems like many have placed trust in their findings, which I have some serious doubts about
based on a little digging as you will see.
Dr. Sapi's et al's improved culture grows a much more vibrant bunch of borrelia if you look at the micrographs in the journal article and the Google patent. Most of us know how the CDC tried to attack it. Yet, if you look at the Sapi et al morphology, it is still very lacking - no L-forms, no variant bubble-like cysts as shown by Dr. MacDonald and others, very limited sophistication in the aggregates. Yet this is the best culture available now. If you look at the spirochetes, how can anyone deny the certainty. And why do we care what the CDC says - they have an end game and it does not include admitting how easy it is to find borrelia in the blood.
Cultures have often been used as bait-and-switch for the cabal to either deny borrelia growth, attributes, or morphological capabilities. They have also been used to test antibiotics or remedies that seem to be able to kill the borrelia.
I am constantly pushing direct imaging tests - acridine orange, Bb fluorescent antibodies, or FISH DNA tests - we know they are not commercially available. As my videos and others have shown, and as Dr. MacDonald stated about
borrelia they are "hiding in plain sight". We just have to reveal them. Dr. MacDonald could find them with ease from dry blood samples; irrespective of the antibiotics one was taking. Dr. Mattman could easily find them. I have just recorded another son of mine with congenital lyme using acridine orange - and they were there by the legions in many forms including L-forms. Tom Grier has stated that L-forms can be found in blood - "The most compelling evidence of spirochetes reverting from its classical form to L-forms and back to the classical form, is sometimes seen in live wet mounts"
BSK culture is terrible, yet it is used by too many scientists in far too many studies. The results of any BSK-culture are semi-irrelevant. I have had a email exchange with Dr. Zhang, which is very illustrative of "the culture battle". As Dr. Zhang stated to me after watching some video: " Thank you John for the interesting videos showing variant forms (L-form, cyst form, biofilm) of Borrelia. I believe they exist in vitro and in vivo, and we need to develop more effective treatment for such forms".
Yet Dr. Zhang's culture studies in BSK do not produce many of these forms that he stated were in my family's blood. Look at the micrographs in his 2014 and 2015 studies - barely anything grows compared to the abundance and morphology of Bb in vivo from the great borrelia scientists. Dr. Zhang et al have small, short uninspiring spirochetes and not many of them. and unsophisticated colonies.
I have seen a great diversity of spirochetes in my family's blood and after emailing Dr. Miklossy some micrographs recently and stating that acridine orange borrelia I have seen demonstrates a far more diverse morphology than BSK studies; she responded "You are right all the bizarre forms can be produced by spirochetes" Dr. Zhang's photos show none of these morphological abilities - yet Dr. Miklossy has demonstrated them in vivo through her studies. She also stated that "you can ask for the blood of any severe Alzheimer’s patient and you will find them also in the blood as we have published it in 1993 and 1994". So there you have it again - people with bad borreliosis have it in the blood. Why do we even need to culture our blood? And also Dr. Miklossy asked me to continue this "wonderful work!" and later stated continue this!!!!! I do not say this for boasting, but to urge others to utilize every tool we can to show borrelia in the blood. Scientists like Dr. Miklossy and Dr. Sapi are constrained as the powers-that-be do not approve of blood studies - look what happened to Drs. Mysterud and Laane!
Dr. Zhang et al's borrelia colonies are very unsophisticated and simplistic, which is not what the in vivo evidence demonstrates or that many of us have seen.
BSK studies are not proper assessments of borrelia's persistence capabilities. Don't listen to me - look at what some scientists say about
-Dr. Zhang in the same 2017 interview - look at his various positions on BSK:
- The current culture technique is not very good. Despite the organism being viable and replicating in some ways, you can't culture it in vitro so far.
- In Lyme this is different. The complexity of the spirochete makes it very difficult to isolate and culture the organism.
- Current science is not advanced enough to find a solution to isolate the organism or to provide a more effective treatment yet
-With Lyme disease we don't have a way to culture this organism like in Tuberculosis
- The organism cannot be detected by culture but mainly by molecular tests like PCR. So it is a very complex organism.
-This indicates that the organism must have replicated in some way but then again you can't culture it. So it is a tricky organism to work with.
Dr. Sapi et al about
- "It has long been an elusive goal to develop a successful in vitro culture method for wild-type, pathogenic Borrelia. Multiple attempts using a variety of methods have not been able to obtain a high yield or keep them alive for an extended period of time"
-The Borrelia-specific Barbour-Stoenner-Kelly media (BSK media) has been used to culture Borrelia, but the sensitivity is suboptimal . The reported sensitivities range from as low as 5% to a maximum of 88% in skin samples but a maximum of only 40-44% for peripheral blood samples. Because of these difficulties, Borrelia cultures until now have not been widely used" WHAT - THEN WHY ARE WE TRUSTING THE IDSA LEADER AND DR. ZHANG?
BUT LET'S BACKTRACK TO DR. AUWAERTER ET AL'S CLAIM IN MARCH OF 2014, THEN LOOK AT WHAT AUWAERTER ET AL, INCLUDING DR. ZHANG WERE UP TO NEXT IN 2014 AND 2015 when they are trying to push Daptomycin:
Remember this in 2014 from Drs. Auwaerter, Lantos, and Wormser: A systematic review of Borrelia burgdorferi morphologic variants does not support a role in chronic Lyme disease where they do a search and peruse or review articles of epic in vivo studies and then claim that variants of borrelia do not have a role. (not that they can grow many in BSK IF THEY EVEN TRIED)
A year later in 2014, Auwaerter et al now seem concerned with the borrelia “persisters”. I thought these forms of morphological variance do not support a role in lyme disease?
They publish: Identification of novel activity against Borrelia burgdorferi persisters using an FDA approved drug library
THIS CONTRADICTION OF AN INTRODUCTION IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS:
Although antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease is effective in the majority of cases, especially during the early phase of the disease, a minority of patients suffer from post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS). It is unclear what mechanisms drive this problem, and although slow or ineffective killing of Borrelia burgdorferi has been suggested as an explanation, there is a lack of evidence that viable organisms are present in PTLDS. Although not a clinical surrogate, insight may be gained by examining stationary-phase in vitro Borrelia burgdorferi persisters that survive treatment with the antibiotics doxycycline and amoxicillin.
REMEMBER AUWAERTER CLAIMED THAT HIS INTERNET SEARCH REVIEWING DECADES OF STUDIES SHOULD BE TRUSTED OVER IN VIVO RESEARCH FROM SCIENTISTS ALL OVER THE WORLD.
SO NOW IN THIS STUDY, ALTHOUGH THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF VIABLE ORGANISMS IN PTLDS, JUST FOR THE HECK OF IT THEY EXAMINE THESE SURVIVING PERSISTERS THAT THEY BLAST WITH A STRAIGHT-ON SHOT OF ANTIBIOTICS. EVEN THOUGH THEY JUST SAID THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THEY EXIST AFTER ANTIBIOTICS. OR THAT "VIABLE ONES EXIST". AFTER ALL PAUL AUWAERTER'S WORD NEGATES ALL EVIDENCE. FORGET about
MIKLOSSY AND MCDONALD'S BIOFILMS AND CYSTS IN THE BRAIN, FORGET about
ALZHEIMER LESION AFTER LESION BEING BORRELIA, FORGET about
THE DANGER OF BIOFILMS AND ALL THE FUNDING IN MEDICINE TO COMBAT THEM.
SO TO MAKE MATTERS WORSE, THEIR NEW-FOUND DESIRE TO EXAMINE THE PERSISTER BORRELIA THAT SHOULDN’T EXIST IN THE PTLDS LYME FOLKS, IS MADE MORE SUSPECT BY MAKING THIS CLAIM:
We recently developed a new SYBR Green I/propidium iodide (PI) assay for rapid viability assessment of B. burgdorferi in a 96-well plate format that is superior to the current commercially available LIVE/DEAD BacLight viability assay
OH THANK YOU – WHY WOULD ANYONE TRUST DR. PAUL AUWAERTER AFTER WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND STATED IN CONDEMNATION OF HIS IDSA GROUP, AND AFTER HE DISCOUNTS REAL SCIENCE WITH HIS GOOGLING. NOW HIS NEW-FOUND DESIRE TO FIND THE BORRELIA THAT ISN’T THERE WILL BE AIDED BY A VERIFICATION TEST THAT THEY JUST DESIGNED – AND ACCORDING TO WHAT THEY SAY IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE STANDARD….
AND THEY JUST HAPPEN TO DISCOVER THAT THESE BORRELIA THAT ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE – ARE INDEED THERE AFTER THEY DOUSE THEM WITH ANTIBIOTICS. THEY DISCOVER THAT DAPTOMYCIN, A ANTIBIOTIC FOR GRAM POSITIVE BACTERIA – NOT WHAT BORRELIA IS – IS EXCELLENT IN THEIR OPINION. THIS IS INTERESTING TIMING CONSIDERING THIS:
-Merck bought Cubist for 9.5 billion in 2014, with the expensive Cubicin (Daptomycin) as their top drug. There was actually an expiration on the patent coming, which meant other drug companies could make their own version of Cubicin, and drug companies all over were going to start investing in "superbug"antibiotics, such as Cubicin, which was a gram-positive antibiotic.
OTHER COMPANIES INCLUDING GENENTECH ARE BOLDLY GETTING BACK INTO superbug ANTIBIOTICS, JUST LIKE MERCK WHO OWNS THE DAPTOMYCIN CUBICIN DRUG. I BET COMPANIES LIKE GENENTECH WOULD LOVE TO MAKE NEW SUPERBUG DRUG IF drugs like Daptomycin can be proven successful in killing superbugs from prominent scientists like those from Johns Hopkins.
MERCK WAS INITIALLY TRYING TO BLOCK OTHER COMPANIES FROM PRODUCING CUBICIN. IF GENENTECH COULD GET IN ON THE SUPERBUG MARKET LIKE DAPTOMYCIN, MERCK’S BIG CASH COW, THEN THEY COULD MAKE A BUNDLE. IT WOULD BE EVEN BETTER FOR GENENTECH AND OTHERS IF THE CUBUCIN MARKET COULD BE EXPANDED BY BEING A FRONT-LINE TREATMENT FOR LYME. FORGET about
THE SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES about
DAPTOMYCIN RESISTANCE OR DAPTOMYCIN CAUSING EOSINOPHILIC PNEUMONIA.
Dr. Auwaerter served on the advisory panel of Genentech. How interesting!
…and by the way the Supreme Court decided later that other companies can make Daptomycin.
back to the AUWAERTER ET AL STUDY TO FIND A MIRACLE CURE:
We determined that daptomycin had the highest activity against B. burgdorferi persisters among all the active hits (Table 1, Figure 3D) but had a high MIC (12.5–25 µg/mL) against log-phase organisms (Table 2). The B. burgdorferi stationary-phase cells treated by daptomycin had almost all red fluorescence as spirochetes (Figure 3D). This result indicated the daptomycin could similarly disrupt the cell membrane of B. burgdorferi, causing PI dye to permeate the cell, leading to cell death. Microscope examination revealed spirochetal shaped remnants after daptomycin treatment (Figure 3A), suggesting that the cells were dead and did not change form to coccoid shape, which occurred following cefoperazone and tetracycline treatment.
THEY SEEM TO ASSUME THAT BORRELIA SPIROCHETES CANNOT ASSUME OTHER FORMS OTHER THAN COCCOID – THEY FOUND SPIROCHETE SHAPED REMNANTS AND ASSUMED THEY WERE DEAD. WELL I AM HERE TO SAY THAT SPIROCHETES CAN ASSUME MANY FORMS WHEN THEY ARE THREATENED, INCLUDING A VAST NUMBER OF SPIROCHETAL FORMS AS MY VIDEOS AND OTHERS DEMONSTRATE, AND THE IN VIVO SCIENTIST LIKE DR. ALAN MACDONALD AND DR. JUDITH MIKLOSSY DEMONSTRATE WITH AN INCREDIBLE VARIETY OF MORPHOLOGIES.
In 2015 the Drs. Auwaerter & Zhang team is at it again:
Drug Combinations against Borrelia burgdorferi Persisters In Vitro: Eradication Achieved by Using Daptomycin, Cefoperazone and Doxycycline
They find the magic three drug combination that kills the "persisters", even though Dr. Zhang stated later regarding cultures- The current culture technique is not very good. Despite the organism being viable and replicating in some ways, you can't culture it in vitro so far.
BUT IT DOESN'T TAKE LONG FOR DR. SAPI ET AL TO NOT COME UP WITH THE SAME RESULTS about
THE MAGIC COMBO:
Before Dr. Sapi et al developed their improved culture, in their 2011 study everything they were using was killing alot of borrelia in BSK, even penicillin - yet we have known for decades that penicillin is largely ineffective.
In 2015 Sapi et al found that the Dr. Zhang et al Daptomycin combo had serious troubles:
In Dr. Sapi et al's Stevia study, look how terrible the Zhang et al Daptomycin and Daptomycin combo did in BSK:
-Daptomycin, one of the other drugs previously identified with potent activity against Borrelia persisters [30, 31], also significantly reduced the live spirochetal enriched log phase culture by ~23%, but it was less sensitive in reducing viable cells in the stationary phase (~16% reduction of live cells) compared to the control (Fig. 2A). Images demonstrated that cells treated with daptomycin, both log and stationary phase show more live cells than dead cells (Fig. 2C: panels vi and xiv) compared to control
-Biofilms treated with doxycycline, cefoperazone, daptomycin, and the three-antibiotic combination showed significant increase in Borrelia biofilm mass compared to the drug-free control (Fig. 4).
IT CAN'T EVEN KILL WIMPY BSK CULTURE BIOFILMS - OH MY!
Post Edited (JohnB2) : 1/3/2018 2:14:08 PM (GMT-7)