Australian Dr finds 95% of his 300 M.E patients have evidence of Lyme.

[Hip]

when an antibiotic meets a bacterium — a spirochete, for example — and the bacterium dies …. what happens to the dead bacterium?

It goes to bacterium heaven...

 

[justy]

It goes to bacterium heaven...

Haha - thanks Hip.

 

[Esther12]

From what I can see in this article, this doctor does take western blots and PCR's into account.

A blood test which was positive for 95% of CFS patients and only a low percentage of healthy controls would be an important finding, regardless of the specifics of the test. I think it's unlikely that this test will show impressive results when assessed under blinded conditions.

 

[duncan]

What if he complied with CDC criteria? ELISA and WB positive? Would you concede it then?

I ask you because imo odds are if you were in the hierarchy of Mainstream Lyme, despite patients being 2T compliant, the stance would likely be that none of these patients had Lyme. This would be based solely on historical prevalence.

 

[mariovitali]

Of course, i do understand the words of caution discussed here. And then i find this :

“Our findings show that persistent infection can cause problems in Lyme disease,” said Marianne Middelveen, lead author of the study published online this week. “We have used sophisticated diagnostic techniques to show that the Lyme spirochete can attack the liver despite antibiotic therapy.”

and

In the study, researchers examined a patient who developed a type of liver inflammation called granulomatous hepatitis during treatment for Lyme disease. Using immunological and molecular testing, they discovered live spirochetes in blood samples from the patient. A liver biopsy also showed evidence of active Borrelia burgdorferi infection using the same sophisticated detection methods. Other infectious and immune causes of hepatitis were excluded.

https://www.lymedisease.org/lyme-hepatitis-2/


So it appears that Lyme disease may be causing problems to the Liver. @Hip i am sure you can recall that according to my Theory CFS, Post-Accutane Syndrome, Post-Finasteride syndrome (and a lot of other syndromes) may well be related to impaired Hepatic Functioning and Intrahepatic circulation.

Please note : The only way to assess 100% the state of Liver is Liver tissue sampling

 

[Esther12]

What if he complied with CDC criteria? ELISA and WB positive? Would you concede it then?

I ask you because imo odds are if you were in the hierarchy of Mainstream Lyme, despite patients being 2T compliant, the stance would likely be that none of these patients had Lyme. This would be based solely on historical prevalence.

I'm more interested in the control group than the test. If he'd used testing which had already been shown to lead to low positive percentages for a healthy population, then that would be something.

 

[Isabelle]

I thought this might be of interest:

'Lead researcher, Professor Peter Irwin of Murdoch University, has been collecting ticks from around Australia to study whether they carry disease-causing bacteria.

“We did not find any evidence of the Lyme disease-causing bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi, but instead discovered a single isolate of a relapsing fever Borrelia, and other potential pathogens, including a new type of Neoehrlichia bacterium,” Professor Irwin said.

The relapsing fever Borrelia and other bacteria found could potentially cause symptoms consistent with Lyme-like disease including extreme fatigue and nausea, but more research is needed to confirm this.'

http://media.murdoch.edu.au/researc...te-around-lyme-disease-and-ticks-in-australia

Professor Peter Irwin is a highly respected researcher. He was instrumental in detecting the first case of babesiosis in Australia.

http://media.murdoch.edu.au/potentially-deadly-new-infection-found-in-australia

 

[heapsreal]

I thought this might be of interest:

'Lead researcher, Professor Peter Irwin of Murdoch University, has been collecting ticks from around Australia to study whether they carry disease-causing bacteria.

“We did not find any evidence of the Lyme disease-causing bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi, but instead discovered a single isolate of a relapsing fever Borrelia, and other potential pathogens, including a new type of Neoehrlichia bacterium,” Professor Irwin said.

The relapsing fever Borrelia and other bacteria found could potentially cause symptoms consistent with Lyme-like disease including extreme fatigue and nausea, but more research is needed to confirm this.'

http://media.murdoch.edu.au/researc...te-around-lyme-disease-and-ticks-in-australia

Professor Peter Irwin is a highly respected researcher. He was instrumental in detecting the first case of babesiosis in Australia.

http://media.murdoch.edu.au/potentially-deadly-new-infection-found-in-australia

Yes probably different strains of bacteria being carried by ticks in australia .
I don't understand why australian authorities are so close minded to ticks carrying infections. So many dam animals that could be carrying ticks also.

Theres even a hiv type virus thats killing koalas. Also a hiv type infection that effects cats but isnt fatal like hiv but sound more lime cfs ? ?

So many infections that haven't been discovered but many drs seem to think everything in medicine has already been found.

 

[Antares in NYC]

So many infections that haven't been discovered but many drs seem to think everything in medicine has already been found.

Indeed. For many doctors I encountered in my 16 year ordeal, if they didn't study it when they were in college, well... it doesn't exist or it's "psychosomatic", garbage title lacking any meaning or proper, scientifically sound diagnosis.

 

[heapsreal]

Indeed. For many doctors I encountered in my 16 year ordeal, if they didn't study it when they were in college, well... it doesn't exist or it's "psychosomatic", garbage title lacking any meaning or proper, scientifically sound diagnosis.

I think all invisible illnesses are treated like that unless your dr has very close ties with the illness.

 

[Vitalic]

There needs to be a genus-based test, i.e., one that broadly identifies if Borrelia is at play at all.

Have you heard of Plex ID?

http://www.aphl.org/conferences/proceedings/Documents/2011/2011_APHL_Annual_Meeting/034McDermott.pdf

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0039928

I believe it is still awaiting FDA approval and so even though they have this technology in some centers in Europe as well as the US it cannot be used on humans yet.

 

[duncan]

@Vitalic - no, I had not seen this. It looks very cool.

I did not see Borrelia Burgdorferi noted, but I have to assume either I missed it, or they just didn't list it.

So, my question is this: Will they included all known Borrelia Species - I am assuming they will - or will they make this an umbrella test that can sniff out ANY Borrelia Species, even unknown species, simply by virtue of those species falling within the Borrelia genus?

Either way, this looks to be exciting and promising technology.

 

[Vitalic]

So, my question is this: Will they included all known Borrelia Species - I am assuming they will - or will they make this an umbrella test that can sniff out ANY Borrelia Species, even unknown species, simply by virtue of those species falling within the Borrelia genus?

I believe this should answer your question: http://www.lymediseaseaction.org.uk...3/10/PHE-LD-conference-2013-Jackie-Duggan.pdf

I did read somewhere in the literature on it that it had the potential to detect undiscovered strains/pathogens as well, so it would be interesting to know whether it can do as you say, either way having one system that can detect 8,000 different organisms and almost every coinfection commonly associated with Borrelia would be a help.

 

[duncan]

If we take the claims at face value, this sounds awesome.

Of course, outside of IgM limitations, they make the C6 and WB sound pretty damned good.

I need to read this again. Wonder if it will be able to distinguish an active infection. Regardless, this sounds so encompassing. Thank you, @Vitalic, for bringing it to everyone's attention

 

[SilverbladeTE]

Monolithic, calcified thinking in the medical profession
plus
highly likely the USA/UK tested out biological weapons in the Outback, as they did with nuclear and chemical weapons, and have ever since been determined to keep all their dirty little secrets and screw ups, covered up, regardless of actual reality, just ANYTHING that might be related they will stamp down on.

Lyme fits right in with the NATO Cold War bioweapon doctrine:
make folk sick for long period,
don't be obvious,
don't kill in huge numbers,
very hard to treat and deal with, and especially make it near impossible to categorize AS a bioweapon attack
ruin the enemy's manufacturing/infrastructure/command personnel (military are much harder to harm due to awareness of NBC weapons etc and NATO viewed destroying enemy's ability to create war materiel as better use of weapons of mass destruction),
don't do anything to obvious/excess that would provoke M.A.D. response.

So they invested heavily in diseases that ruined crops, livestock and sickened people rather than out right killed them

And also remember that a lot of dirty stupid things go on because no one has bothered to find out the reality!!
there MAY have been orders to quash information about things like Lyme in the past, but it may have been temporary and no one bothered to change the rules, to inform them
or that it's just FEARED by some idiot politician who had quiet orders to hush things spread, without even bothering to get really informed by the scientists working on such projects!

for example, very silly thing in British army (WW1 or 2 era) was that they had two guys standing to one side of each artillery piece, well one person investigating how to improve artillery, finally got around ot asking WHY the hell they were standing there doing nothing?
it was because they were the men who once held the horses when the guns were pulled by horses
and no one had ever thought in the years after horses were replaced by trucks, to change this stupid bloody order to have two men stand off to one side doing fak all rather than serve the gun!

moral of that story being to show a lot of stupid crap goes on.

 

[Isabelle]

The response of the Australian authorities was largely due to the findings of a huge tick study in the 90’s that found no evidence of Borrellia borgdorferi or other spirochaetes in Australian ticks.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271457/

Given the growing evidence about a Lyme-like illness in Australia the Senate recently referred the matter to the Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee for inquiry and report.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/Lyme-like_Illness


Professor Irwin’s work is preliminary. Finding potentially pathogenic bacteria in ticks doesn’t prove disease causation in humans. That is another step. So more research is needed. Interesting times though.

http://www.parasitesandvectors.com/content/8/1/345

 

[Snow Leopard]

If he'd had a control group of healthy Australians, and the tests had been double-blind, then that might have been interesting.

By interesting, you mean "Null result"...

I thought this might be of interest:

'Lead researcher, Professor Peter Irwin of Murdoch University, has been collecting ticks from around Australia to study whether they carry disease-causing bacteria.

“We did not find any evidence of the Lyme disease-causing bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi, but instead discovered a single isolate of a relapsing fever Borrelia, and other potential pathogens, including a new type of Neoehrlichia bacterium,” Professor Irwin said.

Yes, any disease caused by tick bites in Australia is not likely to be Lyme disease, it is likely to be from other potential pathogens carried by local ticks.

 

[Esther12]

By interesting, you mean "Null result"...

Null results can be interesting!

 

[Marky90]

Being positive on any test for Lyme disease (except culture which almost no one, even those who definitely have Lyme disease, is positive for) does not necessarily mean you have Lyme disease. Therefore you would be equally justified in saying what you said if someone claimed that 10% had Lyme disease on the standard tests. The only reason to say that about someone claiming 95% and not about someone claiming 10% is that you estimate that the number of people with ME who actually have Lyme is closer to 10% than it is to 90%. However that estimate cannot be based on testing, for the reason I gave above. So what is it based on? The fact that you think ME/CFS is a heterogeneous disease? The response to Ritux?

I agree with you, I just find the estimate to be unlikely based on gut feeling. Which is of no value. I think It`s stupid to put forward estimates like that, when you can`t back it up.