horowitz and culture

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
26 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 1  2 
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 12/12/2017 6:25 PM (GMT -7)   
In Horowitz's new book, he talks about culturing spirochetes as being the gold standard of proof that you have lyme disease. He says even the CDC recognizes culture as official proof of lyme infection. Has anyone done this? Who do you go through to get a culture? How does culturing even work? Do you just need a drop of blood and petri dish?

Girlie
Forum Moderator


Date Joined May 2014
Total Posts : 28711
   Posted 12/12/2017 7:07 PM (GMT -7)   
I don't know where - which Lab you'd go to for this.

It sounds similar to the Galaxy Lab Bartonella test.
They grow a culture to detectable levels to be identified via pcr technology
Moderator, Lyme Forum
Symp started April/2013; Buhner's Lyme May 15-July24/14; Igenex pos. July 3/14
Doxy: July 4-Aug.24/14;Zithro July26-Aug24/14; Amox + Proben. Aug. 29/14;
added biaxin Sept. 26/14
Disc. amox,added Ceftin Nov. 20th.;
Disc. biaxin added Buhner bart herbs Dec/14;Jan/15 pulsing Tinda (w/ Ceftin);
Abx/herb break Apr-July/15; July-mino; Aug. added Rif;
Nov./15 mino - to biaxi

Post Edited (Girlie) : 12/12/2017 7:10:16 PM (GMT-7)


goshawk
Veteran Member


Date Joined Sep 2016
Total Posts : 1477
   Posted 12/12/2017 7:23 PM (GMT -7)   
You would need the right kind of media in the dish.

goshawk
Veteran Member


Date Joined Sep 2016
Total Posts : 1477
   Posted 12/12/2017 7:26 PM (GMT -7)   
https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/analytical-chromatography/microbiology/microbiology-products.html?TablePage=112138019




It would probably have to be incubated


Sorry I cant figure out how to make it a link.

Post Edited (goshawk) : 12/12/2017 7:29:48 PM (GMT-7)


k07
Veteran Member


Date Joined Sep 2015
Total Posts : 2265
   Posted 12/12/2017 8:43 PM (GMT -7)   
I think the most well known lyme culture test is through Advanced Labs.

www.advanced-lab.com/spirochete.php

1000Daisies
Veteran Member


Date Joined Apr 2016
Total Posts : 2132
   Posted 12/13/2017 12:12 AM (GMT -7)   
We have done Advanced Labs for all four of us. My kids were positive right away. Mine came back positive only after a long extended culture, which my doc says that I likely have a low load or it is good at hiding for me. Fwiw, I dont have many symptoms at all for Lyme disease, and I have not been nearly as sick as my kids.

Now that Kid#1 is doing well, I would love to retest him to see what it shows. Simply because I am very analytical and would love to see what the test results show since he is been well now. Sadly, we dont have the money to test for something like this that is nonessential for us.
Kid#1: Extremely sick for several years, very difficult to treat, but doing great now!
Kid#2: Still sick now despite being treated for years but doing better (not well yet).
Kid#3: Generally good but relapsing off/on.
Me: Adv Labs positive 2016 (suspected I passed to my kids)-not as sick as others, mostly battling fatigue and yeast issues (heart/kidney issues resolved)
Treating with herbals now.

Psilociraptor
Veteran Member


Date Joined Jul 2016
Total Posts : 1095
   Posted 12/13/2017 6:25 AM (GMT -7)   
A positive culture would be hard to argue with assuming the lab thats culturing them follows proper sterile technique to avoid cross contamination. That said, there is a reason culture is not routinely used for Lyme. Partly because it's not that sensitive. Particularly in the post-dissemination phase. In fact this has been a big part of the Lyme controversy. Many ID's and chronic Lyme deniers don't seem to understand that you need metabolically active organisms if you want to grow them on culture. Hence culture negativity after treatment gives rise to the delusion that the patient is cured when in reality spirochetes are driven into a non-dividing state (persister cell). On top of that you have to consider that Lyme has a much higher affinity for deep tissue than it does for the blood making it hard to obtain proper samples for culture.

"do you just need a drop of blood and a petri dish".

- No. As I pointed out, blood probably isn't the best sample to use for disseminated Lyme. And culture mediums for Lyme are highly specific. The most popular one is BSK-H. Then you would probably need to incubate it at a certain temperature (just look up a few research papers that use BSK-H and read the protocol). That said, if you have the money to spend I'm not saying it's a lost cause. It could be an interesting project. But if you're any sort of budget I don't think it'd be where I put my money

1000Daisies
Veteran Member


Date Joined Apr 2016
Total Posts : 2132
   Posted 12/13/2017 10:25 AM (GMT -7)   
Psi - I love reading your posts. So knowledgable and informative! I always appreciate your posts. smile

But for this type of testing, I've been told that numerous times on this board that this isn't the best way to test for the lyme spirochetes because it's not in the blood very often. But yet, we read so many personal accounts of people doing dark field microscopy and finding them in their blood (yes, perhaps, some of these may be inaccurate, but there are just so many of these people who are confident they are seeing them in the blood). And yet, when I tested all four of us through Advanced Labs, we were all positive. (Again, mine was only positive after an extended culture, and coincidentally, I have the least symptoms.)

So, I really question whether it's not in the blood as much as previously thought or as we are being told.

I agree that a negative, like other tests, is not confirmative that you don't have lyme disease. (double negative?)

I would soooo love to retest Kid#1 from an analytical perspective to see how he tests now that he's been well for several months. Alas, it's not where I can put my money right now. sad
Kid#1: Extremely sick for several years, very difficult to treat, but doing great now!
Kid#2: Still sick now despite being treated for years but doing better (not well yet).
Kid#3: Generally good but relapsing off/on.
Me: Adv Labs positive 2016 (suspected I passed to my kids)-not as sick as others, mostly battling fatigue and yeast issues (heart/kidney issues resolved)
Treating with herbals now.

gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 12/15/2017 5:06 AM (GMT -7)   
1000daisies - How much does a culture cost through Advanced Labs? This sounds interesting. I might have it performed.

LymeSick 🌟
Regular Member


Date Joined Aug 2017
Total Posts : 165
   Posted 12/15/2017 6:48 AM (GMT -7)   
Hey gfields, I am interested in this too, I found some information here:

What is the cost for the test, and how may I pay for it?

There are several test options available for the Spirochete/Borrelia Culture. A more complete description of test options can be found here. The test prices are as follows:

Basic Borrelia Culture $595
Extended Culture Add-On $150
Monoclonal Antibody Add-On $300

www.advanced-lab.com/faq.php

cr3ativegirl
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 704
   Posted 12/15/2017 8:19 AM (GMT -7)   
1000daisies - you could get kids checked via electro-dermal screening, assuming you could find a qualified practitioner. My last scan showed it not registering anymore, so it's under control theoretically. It also has been great to track the co-infections plus she found molds, etc, which validated certain treatment protocols. Saved a lot of guessing as far as treatment goes. It think its why my LLMD has such a high success rate. He sends every patient to get EDS screened.
Oct 2015 Dx Lyme, Candida, Mold, Toxic Metals, multiple co-infections
Jan 2016 Minocycline pulse/ Nystatin, Flucanizole
Feb 2016 LDI for Mold, Lyme, EBV, Added Tinidozole, Flucanizole
Sept 2016 Switched to Buhner herbs. @ 90%
January 2017 Plaquenil for Babesia @95%
Feb 2017 Dx Mucor/Mycoplasma in Nervous system.
Oct 2017 Dx Bartonella - @95%

gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 12/15/2017 3:41 PM (GMT -7)   
That's actually cheaper than Igenex testing. I wonder why more LLMDs don't go the culture route? Maybe it's less likely to receive a positive result, because you're not guaranteed to have spirochetes in a drop of blood, whereas antibodies are probably ubiquitous in the blood?

gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 12/15/2017 3:53 PM (GMT -7)   
Here is some information on making your own spirochete culture:
http://www.medsci.org/v10p0362.htm

Girlie
Forum Moderator


Date Joined May 2014
Total Posts : 28711
   Posted 12/15/2017 6:12 PM (GMT -7)   
gfields said...
That's actually cheaper than Igenex testing. I wonder why more LLMDs don't go the culture route? Maybe it's less likely to receive a positive result, because you're not guaranteed to have spirochetes in a drop of blood, whereas antibodies are probably ubiquitous in the blood?


It's like the PCR vs WB.

The PCR - a positive is great...you know you've got lyme in your blood. BUT, that relatively small sample may not have any in it...doesn't mean you don't have it...just not in that sample.

Whereas the WB that doesn't matter.
Moderator, Lyme Forum
Symp started April/2013; Buhner's Lyme May 15-July24/14; Igenex pos. July 3/14
Doxy: July 4-Aug.24/14;Zithro July26-Aug24/14; Amox + Proben. Aug. 29/14;
added biaxin Sept. 26/14
Disc. amox,added Ceftin Nov. 20th.;
Disc. biaxin added Buhner bart herbs Dec/14;Jan/15 pulsing Tinda (w/ Ceftin);
Abx/herb break Apr-July/15; July-mino; Aug. added Rif;
Nov./15 mino - to biaxi

1000Daisies
Veteran Member


Date Joined Apr 2016
Total Posts : 2132
   Posted 12/16/2017 9:16 AM (GMT -7)   
gfields said...
That's actually cheaper than Igenex testing. I wonder why more LLMDs don't go the culture route? Maybe it's less likely to receive a positive result, because you're not guaranteed to have spirochetes in a drop of blood, whereas antibodies are probably ubiquitous in the blood?


FWIW - Our functional medicine MD has used both Igenex and Advanced Labs for many years now.

That is a common argument against this type of testing.
But as I've said before, I really challenge this type of thinking. It has been very common on this board and some other places. But yet, numerous people are seeing it in their blood through dark field microscopy. Granted, there could be a little bit of human error, but there are far too many people claiming this to be ignored. Plus, like I said before, my kids were all positive right away (no extended culture). I was positive with an extended culture (I don't have much for symptoms for lyme). So, if it's so difficult to test in blood like this, then why we were all so easily positive then? All four of us? Hmmmm....

I think it's a better test than what it gets credit for (just my opinion).

(All three of my kids also tested through Igenex, but I retested through Advanced Labs because I needed more confirmation than what Igenex could provide at the time. For me, I didn't want to pay for both so I went straight to Advanced Labs testing for myself. At some point, I'd like to test with DNA Connexions for us too, but I just don't have the money/justification for doing so at this time.)
Kid#1: Extremely sick for several years, very difficult to treat, but doing great now!
Kid#2: Still sick now despite being treated for years but doing better (not well yet).
Kid#3: Generally good but relapsing off/on.
Me: Adv Labs positive 2016 (suspected I passed to my kids)-not as sick as others, mostly battling fatigue and yeast issues (heart/kidney issues resolved)
Treating with herbals now.

1000Daisies
Veteran Member


Date Joined Apr 2016
Total Posts : 2132
   Posted 12/16/2017 9:22 AM (GMT -7)   
cr3ativegirl said...
1000daisies - you could get kids checked via electro-dermal screening, assuming you could find a qualified practitioner. My last scan showed it not registering anymore, so it's under control theoretically. It also has been great to track the co-infections plus she found molds, etc, which validated certain treatment protocols. Saved a lot of guessing as far as treatment goes. It think its why my LLMD has such a high success rate. He sends every patient to get EDS screened.

Thanks for the tip. I appreciate it. smile

We have not done that type of testing yet, but it sounds similiar to some other things we have done. We have done numerous muscle testing (few practitioners), as well as FCT (which very few people on this board have apparently tried). We tried them for years. And truth be told, it just sent us in circles with no real healing or help. I have posted about my FCT experience (how eventually I got a lab to contradict what he was telling me, as I had strong reason to not trust it anymore). And I really did like the muscle testing practitioner we saw the most, although he was quirky. He sure knew a lot about how the body works. But he just sent us in circles with no real healing. I gave it a fair trial (years).

I have no doubt that it can and does help some people. I just don't believe we were one of them and no longer pursue this. I wish I was wrong. But our experience wasn't helpful/healing. sad
Kid#1: Extremely sick for several years, very difficult to treat, but doing great now!
Kid#2: Still sick now despite being treated for years but doing better (not well yet).
Kid#3: Generally good but relapsing off/on.
Me: Adv Labs positive 2016 (suspected I passed to my kids)-not as sick as others, mostly battling fatigue and yeast issues (heart/kidney issues resolved)
Treating with herbals now.

Kct
Regular Member


Date Joined May 2016
Total Posts : 145
   Posted 12/16/2017 11:50 AM (GMT -7)   
Culture proven is rare. It usually requires CSF fluid. I was just at the ILADS conference and that was not emphasized at all in the diagnostic presentations. Havent heard anything about + blood cultures. As a PA for 35 years clinically the blood culture is a low yield test like PCR which I think is at best 30% ? correct me if Im wrong. It remains a clinical diagnosis consider yourself lucky if you get all the bands from Igenex or a +PCR like I had

gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 12/16/2017 12:23 PM (GMT -7)   
Do they have to determine whether it's a lyme spirochete to make a positive diagnosis (ie - DNA testing)? Or, as long as it's a spirochete, they consider it to be lyme. Or, maybe the medium that they put it in only allows for lyme to grow, and therefore it has to be a lyme spirochete.

Kct
Regular Member


Date Joined May 2016
Total Posts : 145
   Posted 12/23/2017 11:25 AM (GMT -7)   
Timing of PCR of 1-2 weeks on, then off abx increases the sensitivity because of the die off and rebound activity of the spirochete in the blood stream. Thats how my PCR became + and it was by accident.

JohnB2
New Member


Date Joined Sep 2017
Total Posts : 18
   Posted 1/3/2018 11:18 AM (GMT -7)   
Hello all,

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 BSK:

-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 BSK:

- "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)


gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 1/3/2018 4:19 PM (GMT -7)   
Hi JohnB2, Do you think the culture from Advanced Labs is a good one?

A lot of this information is over my head.

JohnB2
New Member


Date Joined Sep 2017
Total Posts : 18
   Posted 1/4/2018 7:46 AM (GMT -7)   
Dr. Eva Sapi's group has the best culture commercially available. Anyone who wants to find spirochetes or other borrelia morphologies cannot go wrong. I am not sure if they provide photos of the morphologies which would be great.

I would recommend attempting to find a researcher who has access to tests that actually work, which could verify borrelia DNA or direct imaging.

This is not easy to accomplish. With respect to my long post, the cabal has used a MO for decades, which employs a bait and switch by denying mountains of verified borrelia research and/or using poorly designed tests that will almost always fail to claim there is no borrelia. Going back to the example of Dr. Auwaerter, Wormser, and Lantos, they deny in their internet search paper reviewing actual science that Alzheimers is caused by pathogenic borrelia, whether spirochetes or other morphological variants. Anyone with a basic internet searching ability who typed in google "alzheimer spirochetes" or Alzheimer's borrelia" would find many articles of scientists who actually have examined Alzheimer's lesions.

Dr. Miklossy is the international head of the Alzheimer's research group. Both she and her colleagues have researched these lesions for decades. They have found borrelia and other spirochetes making up these lesions for many many years. Dr. MacDonald in America found borrelia in 100 out of 100 Alzheimer's lesions. Drexel University also found the same with spirochetal and borrelial make up of the lesions. Auwaerter et al just deny that there is any evidence of this, even though a 6th grader could find these articles.

Another tactic they use relevant to our discussion on diagnostics is found in Auwaerter et al's same article denying any pathogenicity of borrelia variants. They also claim that there is no evidence of Alzheimer's being caused by borrelia because "Further systematic investigations of patients with Alzheimer disease have failed to demonstrate evidence of neuroborreliosis by either culture or microscopy". This is patently false. We have many micrographs from Drs. McDonald, Miklossy, Drexel, and many others. And this borellia making up Alzheimer's lesions has been verified as borrelia by the scientists using various methods, including H9724 invented by Dr. Alan Barbour. Auwaerter et al also deny the connection to MS. Many of us are familiar with the over 100 years of evidence by scientists finding spirochetes with MS, leading up to Dr. MacDonald's study before he retired finding borrelia in all of the brains he checked at the MS brain bank. Auwaerter et al state "As for the report of “cyst-like” structures in the CSF of MS patients, it must be noted that these subjects all tested negative by PCR for B. burgdorferi". And this relates perfectly to our discussion as I will explain.

The cabal uses terrible PCRs whose primers have the wrong borrelial targets, then when the sample is negative they conclude no borrelia. A Professor who has decades of expertise in borrelia testing and I were corresponding and he explains this very well. My wife had a synovial cyst that had to be drained. If you look this up synovial cysts can often be caused by localised borrela. I had arranged for the hospital to give me the synovial fluid for the professor to test. I gave the hospital the collection materials, but after the procedure, I discovered they did not collect the fluid. I then emailed the Professor and here is his response which explains the bait and switch well:

This is so typical. A couple years ago, the husband of a colleague of mine was diagnosed with CJD at Mayo Clinic Jacksonville. They had CSF, but despite dogged requests from his wife, they would not release any of the sample for me to test. That patient was IFA equivocal and had 3 IgM bands and 5 IgG bands on a Lyme WB done at IgeneX. His blood tested positive for Lyme Borrelia DNA several times in my PCR testing. All of these results were completely ignored by the doctors at Mayo because he was PCR negative at their lab. He died about 2 years after Mayo gave him the CJD diagnosis. I have learned of about 5 patients in total, from around Florida, who have died in the past 2 years. All were confirmed to have Lyme in my testing. Two patients were in their 70s, one was in her 60s, and the other two were in their 40s or early 50s.At the LDA meeting in MN a few weeks ago, the director of Mayo Rochester’s lab that does their Lyme testing (Dr. Bobbi Pritt) reported that they get PCR positives in less than 0.1% of samples they test. What does that say about their sensitivity?

This professor uses a PCR test that actually works and that has been used for a long time because its targets are a part of the borrelia that is homologous to all borrelial species and genetic variants. This use of PCRs based on the wrong borrelial targets or use of tests based on decades old B31 borrelial attributes, and scientific studies that are flawed because they use the ancient ATCC 35210 strain are all too common to give everyone false testing results. It's ironic that Dr. Mattman, Dr. Miklossy, Dr. McDonald and many others all find acridine orange suitable to find borrelia in the blood, even the CDC acknowledges it, yet no one can have it done commercially. Dr. Sapi's culture is great, but not as applicable to testing for antibiotic efficacy, since it cannot produce L-forms, and the variation of cystic, spirochetal morphologies that the body of literature displays and that I regularly see. We need in vivo tissue, body, and blood studies. She has done some of these studies and is one of the best we have.

Post Edited (JohnB2) : 1/4/2018 7:58:06 AM (GMT-7)


Missouri
Regular Member


Date Joined Sep 2017
Total Posts : 174
   Posted 1/4/2018 9:36 AM (GMT -7)   
Love the Post!

I am curious your opinions as to why the cabal is doing what they are doing.

Its obvious they are trying to control all aspects of the disease, but why?

Are they trying to profit off current test kits, vaccines, or patents?

Are they trying to save face from the decades of perpetuating bad info?

What is their end game here?

I wonder if they actually believe some of their own bulls**t.

Why can't these alternate science studies make it into the hands of main street GP's?

gfields
Veteran Member


Date Joined Oct 2015
Total Posts : 923
   Posted 1/4/2018 6:11 PM (GMT -7)   
I think they have financial interests here. They get paid off by the insurance companies. I think that's what the current class action lawsuit is about. Conflict of interest for all these lyme doctors. I'm not sure you can really call them doctors. They're more like fraudsters.

JohnB2
New Member


Date Joined Sep 2017
Total Posts : 18
   Posted 1/4/2018 11:01 PM (GMT -7)   
I agree with gfields, but it also seems to be far bigger than insurance companies. The example I gave above with Daptomycin or whatever antibiotic to kill superbugs that may in fact do nothing to kill the bacteria adds fuel to the fire. All you have to do as a pharmaceutical company like Merck or all the companies trying to resurrect these antibiotics that have been attempted in the past and have been failures, is to get a IDSA guidelines author or prominent cabal scientist to perform a study, however flawed, and claim that the antibiotic will kill borrelia. Who could know more than the head of IDSA? And Lymerix was pulled off the shelves, as Dr. Burgdorfer stated " And it’s already on the market … and you see that every day …You see that this company is falling down, and these guys are realizing that the vaccine work is full of holes and never should have come out. A lot of people are going to pay for that. They’re going to get sick with Lyme as a result of the vaccination". But despite the fact that they made so much money off Lymerix - did any of these scientists who made it get in any trouble? So if Daptomycin or ABC antibiotic gives you Eosinophilic pneumonia or fails you and you are still left with your lyme, how much money will be made by Merck and all of the copycat versions on the market now before that is pulled from the shelves. And no one will get in trouble - maybe a few lawsuits but the profits will more than cover those.

And when the Drs. Auwaerter, Zhang, and friends can kill the wimpy ATCC 35210 Shelter island wimpoid spirochetes in a culture where they barely grow and form pathetic weak colonies with no L-forms, cysts, or infinite variety of variants; then they will be heroes and sure to keep the huge government grants and foundation money from who knows where rolling in.

Take another example from guidelines authors in another realm. You will see our beloved Dr. Auwaerter's name among them:

Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery

Now look at the pharma companies that some are in league with that are listed in these guidelines:

Dr. Bratzler is a consultant for Telligen; Dr. Dellinger has received honoraria for participation on advisory boards and consultation for Merck, Baxter, Ortho-McNeil, Targanta, Schering-Plough, WebEx,
Astellas, Durata, Pfizer, Applied Medical, Rib-X, 3M, the American Hospital Association, Premier Inc., Oklahoma Foundation for Medical Quality, and the Hospital Association of New York State; Dr. Perl
serves on the advisory boards of Hospira and Pfizer and has received a grant from Merck; Dr. Auwaerter serves on the advisory panel of Genentech; Dr. Fish serves on the advisory board and speakers’ bureau of Merck; and Dr. Sawyer serves as a consultant for Pfizer, Merck,
Wyeth, 3M, and Ethicon.

Then we have to factor in the huge number of fake diseases with acronyms we cannot remember that are really spirochetal in origin. Think of the money made by giving these patients pharmaceuticals, treatment of all kinds, and the massive grant money by all the groups set up to study these diseases with "no known etiology". I recently tried to convince a lady with MS that since 1910 there have been many, many scientists who believed spirochetes and other variants from borreliosis and other spirochetal diseases cause MS, and there are some people in the lyme movement, including doctors that have made great strides to reduce their morbidities through a strong regimen of antibiotics.
This ladies was thinking about a treatment that was $100,000 for her MS.

Yes, all of the patent holders of all the diagnostics that are worthless, and all of the other worthless patents that have done nothing are part of it. Remember the words of Dr. Burgdorfer before he died "The controversy in lyme disease research is a shameful affair. I say that because the whole thing is politically tainted. Money goes to people that have for the past 30 years produced the same thing - nothing".

There are people in the cabal protecting themselves from lawsuits and prosecutions for their past sins, and the CDC is corrupt. The government seems to not want to have to deal with the massive expense of those with lyme as health care is a train wreck. There is also the possibility that some believe, who
hold that the modern borrelia was scientifically engineered to achieve its current superbug of superbugs status, by plasmid manipulation or some other malevolence.

But like everything else in the modern world. power is held by a small few, a "super-entity" as Swiss researchers have called it, who control much of the money. The wealthy get wealthier and even a mass-outrage from borreliosis sufferers and scientists around the world has still not yet succeeded. But it has had a positive effect. In the end, for ourselves and our families - we have to all prove our own persistent borrelia - both because we need to know if we are still afflicted so we can take a course of action and need to protect our loved ones from the myriad who will call their suffering a figment of their imaginations.

By the way - my son was feeling bad and did not look good recently. I am actually fairly good at knowing if he is experiencing a mild febrile period in the bacterial cycle and I took a drop of blood and the spirochetal morphing was like nothing I have seen recorded with acridine orange. If you check the sample right away, which I cannot always do - you can catch them morphing into various aggregate forms. This video is unbelievably shocking that I will be posting soon. I could only think "These things are aliens".

Post Edited (JohnB2) : 1/4/2018 11:22:38 PM (GMT-7)

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
26 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 1  2 
Forum Information
Currently it is Wednesday, January 17, 2018 12:19 AM (GMT -7)
There are a total of 2,917,873 posts in 320,177 threads.
View Active Threads


Who's Online
This forum has 159262 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, Jake Flow.
212 Guest(s), 3 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
Jake Flow, timbo59UK, straydog