32 of 40 chronically ill have spirochetes in their blood

Messages
582
Likes
1,662
Location
USA
this all doesnt seem to bother too many people..
we are deploying robots to the mars and control them from earth...
in switzerland they actually replicate the creation of the universe...
...while these people cant find the parasites wiggling in your blood and body...
this is a fail of unprecedented order. this is criminal.
Well said, and yes, it is a massive fail and wish there were serious investigations of this matter, both in the labs and in the courts of law.
 

mango

Senior Member
Messages
905
Likes
4,978
First off all, why would you bash this, saying its pretending to be something it isn’t?
i assume this question is for me? that comment was about the blog newsaboutdisease where the study is published, not about the study itself.

the blogger claims to "have read all the studies ever published about ME/CFS"(!), implying that he's an authority on the subject.

for example, there are articles (blog posts) on there that are explicitly adressed "to scientists and clinicians", presenting medical information as well as treatment suggestions for ME/CFS.

further, the blogger has repeatedly contacted several decision makers and people of power (doctors, scientists, politicians, lobbyists, journalists etc) trying to influence - among other things - the national clinical guidelines for ME/CFS, while giving the impression that he speaks for the patient group as a whole. i wildly disagree with most of his opinions and most definitely his approach (do first, think later; keep taking huge risks and learn from your mistakes on the expense of a big group of very very sick and vulnerable people,...). this is problematic, from my personal point of view.

Second, theese are no speculations.
there are plenty of speculations on the blog. that's fine. there's nothing wrong with that, if you are very clear about the difference between the "scientific facts" and the personal opinions/speculations you are presenting.

Third, this person is not controversial in Sweden. How can a person be controversial? If you say something lie this, probably you should explain exactly what you mean.
this has nothing to do with the study, that's why i wasn't going to expand on it. it's a very long story... in short: besides his reckless and inconsiderate risktaking methods, he's also known for his very strong manipulative techniques (mainly censoring criticism) as well as intentionally and purposefully creating conflicts and divisiveness among patients. just to name a few things.

(i'm sorry, this probably breaks forum rules... i just don't know how to reply to this without doing just that...)

altogether, this makes me have serious concerns and in my personal view it definitely affects his credibility too...
 

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,197
Likes
4,749
I think dark field microscopy sounds intriguing, but I don't know a whole lot about it other than from writings of researchers like MacDonald and Miklossy.

I don't know why this opportunity is not explored more.

I did want to point out, though, that not all spirochetes are Borrelia. Miklossy is also interested in oral spirochetal pathogens, for example.
 
Messages
37
Likes
145
Location
Sweden
This is not a evidence baced study. It is private.

My wife has been sick for over 7 years. She became ill in autumn 2008 by a tick bite. 2012 she was diagnosed with ME / CFS. She never received any treatment for Lyme disease. A disease that I suspected from the beginning. She got negative results by ELISA tests. A test that is completely useless on the basis of international studies available.
http://www.aonm.org/assets/dr.-armin-schwarzbach-aonm-lifting-the-veil.pdf

Autumn 2015 she made a test of a Chinese bachelor. With dark field microscopy we could clearly see that she had spirochetes in her blood. And even babesios, barton and mycoplasma.

I have read almost all studies of ME / CFS (+ 2000 hours) and understood that there are no biomarkers - yet. You can read my summary here - Please translate with Google Translate. I hope you will understand that I know a lot.
https://newsaboutdisease.wordpress.com/

When I was suspecting she might have Lyme disease, I contacted a biomedical scientist who worked in a laboratory for several years, and also served on the education of Bela Bozsik in Hungary. Her name is Titti Alvarsson.

Titti is using a special method to show whether you have Lyme disease or not. Frequently terapeuet using capillary blood. It's simple. You can just take a finger prick. Adding drop under a microscope. But it is far from enough. You have to take venous blood, and you have to centrifuge the blood!.

During centrifugation, the plasma separates from the blood cells. Experience shows that any spirochetes, if available, accumulate in the area between the plasma and blood cells. Precisely this is important to remember! Titti was mad at me because I revealed this method. But, I think it is important that everyone learns. The accumulation of "middle" is placed under a microscope (darkfield). Then we can see if there are spirochetes or not.

I am a director of a FB group of more than 1100 patients with ME / CFS in Sweden. I asked who was interested to be part of an investigation. I got together 40 patients. All paid individually for what it cost to carry out the investigation. A total of about 60 000 SEK. Approximately $ 8,000.

I have not received a penny my self. I have only done this to show that there may be a possibility that a subgroup of ME / CFS may actually be suffering from Lyme disease.

I do not claim that it is Lyme disease. But evidence suggests that, definitely when you see all the symptoms of patients who participated.

Thanks
Mats Lindstrom
Sweden
 
Last edited:

roller

wiggle jiggle
Messages
735
Likes
652
apologies for the uninformed question...

but why dont they test pathogens in the lymph fluid or biopsy?
that would be the safest bet or not?

@matsli
then possibly none of the pathogens found is contagious, as you dont have them?
 
Messages
5
Likes
19
Regarding @mango criticism of Mats. I don't agree. And there are countless of people who have had huge benefit of Mats work. No one knows this disease 100% and mistakes are a part of the learning process.

Without Mats many would be fumbling in the dark. He as done a huge amount of work for free. Knowledge sharing to be able to find a cure for his wife. But I dont see any reason for the trash talk so i will not address that further.

@Scarecrow
The microscope was 800x dark field. So you cant clearly see them in the corkscrew form in the videos the image quality on the capture software is worse than what you see in the microscope.
An even better microscope is more expensive (1200x for an example). But well see if we can fix a better one for the future.
Just by looking at my video on page 2. I cant think of it being anything else than a spirochete. Or do someone know what else it could be?

Regards
 
Messages
3
Likes
32
Location
Sweden
@mango: I thought this thread was about the study, not his blog. It shouldn’t matter who wrote it, just that it exists. How do you look at science? Do you dismiss an article bcs of who wrote it? Thats very subjective.

I wish it could have just been posted in the right group. Should you bash the author for that? Bash the other guy, or just deal with it in a proper way maybe?

I don’t even want to discuss his blog bcs I’m too tired to allways read it, I only check in every now and then and Im not gonna go through his whole blog, however I’d rather trust a person who read everything about ME, then a person that didn’t…for example every doctor I met.

What’s wrong with him trying to influence whats happening in the ME world…everyone is free to do so. I guess he is representing the group who backs him up. I’m pretty sure he is aware of not representing everyone in the whole community, they made that very clear to him.

I think its very sad that the progress is very slow and that if someone try to do something they will be bashed, instead of thanked for the work they did. Ofcourse nothing happen when everything has to be perfect to get to the public eye. You can’t start with evidence, you have to start somewhere else first…it’s a process, and I think you know that.

This man goes out with name and pic and stand for what he does…I wish whoever decides to bash him at least could do the same.
 

Scarecrow

Revolting Peasant
Messages
1,904
Likes
5,334
Location
Scotland
Thanks for the explanation, Pactallon.

Just by looking at my video on page 2. I cant think of it being anything else than a spirochete. Or do someone know what else it could be?
I appreciate what you are saying about the video quality. It's very difficult to make anything out clearly in the video you put up but what does stand out is that the movement is jerky and not like anything I could see on the Canadian video in my post above.
 
Messages
582
Likes
1,662
Location
USA
@matsli The microscopy is very interesting but the bacterium in the video clip doesn't look like the typical spirochaete corkscrew (as @Jonathan Edwards pointed out).
Hi @Scarecrow: borrelia spirochetes morph into different shapes depending on the pressures of the environment: corkscrew shape, L-shape (linear), cysts and blebs. It's quite a resilient organism.

I'm NOT saying the bug in the video IS borrelia, but it's consistent with other videos of spirochetes available online. (I feel like lately I have to walk on eggshells over here).
 
Last edited:

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Likes
4,962
: I thought this thread was about the study, not his blog. It shouldn’t matter who wrote it, just that it exists. How do you look at science? Do you dismiss an article bcs of who wrote it? Thats very subjective.
I'm not questioning the intent of the author however well meaning it is.

To be quite honest the study is not scientific at all. In fact it's not a study. That may be contributing to the confusion about where the blog ends and the science begins.

Sciencific investigations start with a hypothesis. Whether further study is needed has a lot to do with the strength of the hypothesis. It's called plausibility. This is one of many ways to separate the wheat from the chaff in evidence based medicine.

How likely is it that one person out of all the scientific world has found this? I don't know the but maybe it means this data needs to be turned over to scientists who can look closer at this and determine the plausibility of this theory.
 

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Likes
4,962
I don't believe there has ever been a serious study looking at Borrelia infection rates in people diagnosed with ME or CFS.
Was this blog saying the patient has both mecfs and lyme or Lyme which was misdiagnosed as me/cfs? Looks like I need to reread.
 

leela

Slow But Hopeful
Messages
3,279
Likes
7,327
Location
Couchland, USA
@matsli Thank you so much for sharing your work. Innovators should not be dismissed out of hand. All science/innovation is based on bold new discovery, as well as on discovery of what has been wrong or missing from the currently accepted knowledge base.

For those talking about the spiral form, it is key to note that Borrellia are a pleomorphic organism (as are many microbes, and come to think of it, higher organisms)
in that they change form. Much work on this subject has been done (and largely ignored.)
Ignoring this is akin to saying butterflies don't exist while you hold a caterpillar in your hand.
http://mic.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000027
 

Dufresne

almost there...
Messages
997
Likes
1,312
Location
Montreal
I'm not questioning the intent of the author however well meaning it is.

To be quite honest the study is not scientific at all. In fact it's not a study. That may be contributing to the confusion about where the blog ends and the science begins.

Sciencific investigations start with a hypothesis. Whether further study is needed has a lot to do with the strength of the hypothesis. It's called plausibility. This is one of many ways to separate the wheat from the chaff in evidence based medicine.

How likely is it that one person out of all the scientific world has found this? I don't know the but maybe it means this data needs to be turned over to scientists who can look closer at this and determine the plausibility of this theory.
It might be somewhat informal but this layman would say it's a study.

And the hypothesis is pretty clear: perhaps those chronically ill (31 diagnosed with ME/CFS) have a higher incidence of spirochetes in their blood than healthy subjects.

Plausibility? Well he's finding something that looks like it might be Bb at a rate similar to what KDM is finding these days.

Microscopy is arguably where the modern medical age started. For sure with DFM, a legitimate scientific instrument, you can see a whole lot of stuff you can't with regular microscopy. Can we find Waldo in there, too? Not yet. I'm actually interested in what those frantic little white dots are. I know Enderlein named and characterized them, but as far as I know nobody has ever looked into this further. Why?

And this person is not the only one to ever point out spirochetes in chronic disease by dark field microscopy. However every time someone does it's somehow poo-pooed by 'well-meaning' scientists. Just as they shit on Igenex western blots (must be past infection) positive FISH tests for babesia (lab must be corrupt), Elispot (unverified), the odd positive PCR (must be contamination), etc. This is just my opinion but if there's any weak methods out there that "might lead us down the wrong alley" it's Lipkin's pathogen study.

The method seems incredibly simple. I hope someone tries to replicate it. Then I suppose the next logical thing to do is a PCR.
 
Last edited:

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,197
Likes
4,749
Just google Dr. Alan MacDonald or Professor Morten Laanes or Dr. Judith Miklossy combined with dark field microscopy. That should give you a good primer on DFM specific to Bb, @barbc56 .
 

adreno

PR activist
Messages
4,841
Likes
10,910
Zentralbl Bakteriol. 1994 Aug;281(2):183-91.
Comparison of dark-field microscopy, culture, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of Borrelia burgdorferi in field-collected Ixodes ricinus ticks.
Wittenbrink MM1, Thiele D, Krauss H.
Author information

Abstract
In a study based on 100 field-collected female Ixodes (I.) ricinus ticks from the surroundings of Giessen, dark-field microscopy (DFM), culture, and PCR were compared as procedures for detecting Lyme borreliosis spirochetes in ticks. By DFM, 16 ticks were found to be infected with spirochetes. From the midgut of 18 ticks (including 14 microscopically positive specimens), spirochetes were cultured in BSK II medium and in BSK II medium supplemented with either co-trimoxazole (500 micrograms/ml) or 5-fluorouracil and kanamycin (200 micrograms/ml and 8 micrograms/ml). Using these selective media, the isolation rate was increased by 50% compared to BSK II medium without additives. Midgut homogenates of 22 ticks (including 13 ticks positive by culture and 12 microscopically positive ticks) were found to contain Borrelia (B.) burgdorferi-specific DNA by PCR using a primer set based on sequences of the flagellin gene of B. burgdorferi.