Dr Igor Markov Says ME/CFS Is Caused by a Bacterial Dysbiosis in the Kidneys, and Says Autovaccine Therapy Cures 93% of ME/CFS Cases

[Atlas]

I'm unable to find any evidence that the kidneys normally have any microbiome at all? This article on the gut-kidney axis says that it is considered sterile...?:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2020.620102/full#B34

If healthy kidneys are sterile, is the term "kidney dysbiosis" even valid? Or is this a case of it's assumed to be sterile, like the bladder was for a long time, but may actually not be (like the bladder turned out to not be)?

Also of note in that same article relevant to the CBIS theory (discussing other sources mentioning bacterial translocation):

"As discussed previously, when microbial communities are imbalanced, the disruption of the normal gut microbiota may lead to intestinal dysbiosis due to the breaching of the intestinal barrier. Moreover, it is reported that passage of viable bacteria may occur from the gut to other extraintestinal sites including the kidney. This bacterial translocation may be associated with bacterial dysbiosis, bacterial overgrowth, and low host immune defense"

 

[Hip]

This article on the gut-kidney axis says that it is considered sterile...?:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2020.620102/full#B34

The paper says:

In contrast to the old belief that the urinary tract is sterile recent studies demonstrated that the urinary tract possesses a unique microbiota

Although the paper then states:

Kidney is considered sterile in both men and women.

Which is confusing, since the kidneys are part of the urinary tract.

But I think the key word in that statement is "considered", which I suppose means that's the best guess. To demonstrate a kidney microbiome, I expect it might require post-mortem studies on this organ.

 

[Atlas]

It appears to me to be saying the lower urinary tract has bacteria but the kidneys (in the upper urinary tract) are considered sterile.

That would seem strange, you'd think since the whole system is connected there would be bacterial communities at the kidneys.

In kidney infections the bacteria travels up the urethra and then the ureter to get there, so since there is a bladder microbiome I don't see why some commensal bacteria wouldn't also migrate up to live on the walls of the kidneys. But perhaps not inside the kidneys themselves. I don't know the anatomy of the kidneys, guess will need to look into where the "mucous membranes" that Dr. Markov thinks have a dysbiosis are located.

To demonstrate a kidney microbiome, I expect it might require post-mortem studies on this organ.

Yeah, I was hoping to find some that had already been done but only found info about bladder and urethra microbiome.

 

[Garz]

its likely just a hang over from past decades where most sites inside the body were considered sterile in healthy persons - but this was just an assumption - mainly because they didn't have the teqniques to detect small non fast growing quantities of bacteria - so "no evidence of bacteria" - easily became assumed sterile

now with the advent of molecular methods like PCR, NGS, CRISP-R etc - we find that there are in fact bacterial communities in many if not all of these locations - even in the inside of organs like the brain. And the challenge has moved onto interpreting what this really means in terms of health and disease.

so it may just be a time lag thing - where the studies have just not yet been done on the kidney - as so far there may not have been a good reason to go and look with the newer methods.

i would think it is in fact safer to assume that there is in fact normally some kind of microbiome present in the kidney in healthy persons - at least in the compartments that are open to the bladder side ( and possibly deeper if the mucosal barrier is disturbed) - as we know bacterial communities exist in the bladder /rest of the urinary tract - and there is a direct connection between these sites and a suitable medium flowing between them.

 

[Wishful]

I agree with Garz, about the lack of microbiomes being just poor technology at the time. It also makes me think of how food labels are allowed to report "0" when the amount is less than "1.0". If some microbes had been detected, they might have been ignored as 'slight contamination" and ignored so they wouldn't have to redo the experiment.

I'm pretty sure the kidneys don't have secret death rays to zap microbes coming up the urethra.

 

[Lilliand]

pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase[/B], which in turn reduces inhibits pyruvate dehydrogenase, a crucial enzyme in aerobic glycolysis (pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase acts as an inhibitor of pyruvate dehydrogenase). Ref: here.

Sorry for the reply to an old post, I've just started learning about this subject.

If you're positive for any of of the bacteria in you're urine that causes CBIS, couldn't you test your pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase levels to help determine if you have a slow sepsis? I believe there is a serum test for that.

 

[Hip]

If you're positive for any of of the bacteria in you're urine that causes CBIS, couldn't you test your pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase levels to help determine if you have a slow sepsis? I believe there is a serum test for that.

I am not sure, but Fluge and Mella found that pyruvate dehydrogenase is impaired in ME/CFS patients, and that PDH kinases are elevated.


It would be great if we could detect these bacterial toxins directly in the blood of ME/CFS patients, then we could see if they are elevated with respect to healthy controls. But detection of such bacterial proteins is difficult. I believe in principle it can be done with Raman spectroscopy, but even then it is challenging.

I'd like to know how the Toxicon lab test works. Dr Markov uses this Toxicon test demonstrate high levels of bacterial toxins in his ME/CFS patients. The Toxicon diagnostic system was developed by a Ukrainian research team led by toxicologist Dr Borys S Sheiman. But I could find no equivalent test in the West. Nor could I find any details about how the Toxicon test works.

Hmm.... I just posed this question to ChatGPT, and got an interesting reply:

How does the Toxicon lab test work, which was developed by a group of Ukrainian scientists led by pediatric toxicologist Dr Borys S Sheiman?

The Toxicon lab test is a rapid, simple, and cost-effective test to identify the presence of hazardous and toxic substances in food, beverages, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals. The test is based on a colorimetric technique that measures the intensity of the color change of a sample in the presence of a specific toxic substance.

Samples are first prepared for the test, which includes homogenization, extraction, and filtration. The sample is then mixed with a reagent specific for the toxic substance. If the sample contains the toxic substance, the color of the sample will change to a characteristic hue. This hue is then compared with a color chart to determine the concentration of the toxic substance.

The test is capable of detecting a wide range of toxins, including heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, and other pollutants. The Toxicon lab test was designed to provide reliable results in a short amount of time and at a fraction of the cost of traditional toxicology tests.

Then I asked the same question again in slightly different ways:

Tell me about Dr Borys S Sheiman's research which led to the creation of the Toxicon test, a test which can detect the presence of toxic bacterial proteins.

Dr Borys S Sheiman's research focused on the development of a method to detect the presence of toxic bacterial proteins in a sample. His research resulted in the creation of the Toxicon test, a highly sensitive and specific test for the detection of bacterial proteins.

The test uses an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect the presence of proteins from bacteria, including Salmonella typhi, Escherichia coli, and Shigella spp.

In addition, the Toxicon test has also been used to detect the presence of proteins from other infectious agents, such as viruses and fungi. The test is used in the diagnosis of bacterial infections, as well as for the identification of foodborne pathogens. The Toxicon test is highly specific and sensitive, and has been successfully used in numerous clinical and research settings.

How does the Toxicon bacterial toxin test developed by Boris Semenovich Sheiman (Борису Семеновичу Шейману in Ukrainian) work?

The Toxicon bacterial toxin test developed by Boris Semenovich Sheiman uses a principle known as antigen-antibody binding. In this method, a specific antibody is added to a sample containing the toxin. If the toxin is present, it will bind to the antibody and form an antigen-antibody complex.

The presence of this complex can then be detected and quantified using a fluorescence-based detection system. This allows for the quick and accurate detection of bacterial toxins in a sample.

Of course, you cannot always trust what ChatGPT says, sometimes it makes things up, or gets things wrong.

 

[Lilliand]

That is interesting.

Did you get the Toxicon lab test done? Or does he only do that for local patients?

 

[Hip]

Did you get the Toxicon lab test done? Or does he only do that for local patients?

No I didn't do Toxicon. I am not sure if the Toxicon test could be done on remote patients. I guess in principle it might be possible; it would probably require a blood sample shipped by fast courier.

But I thinking more in terms of some Western researchers looking at the level of bacterial toxins in ME/CFS patients. If these toxins are there as Dr Markov states, then this might open a whole new branch of ME/CFS research. Dr Markov says he really would like other researchers to look into his theories and findings, but so far there are no takers in the West.

 

[Atlas]

But I thinking more in terms of some Western researchers looking at the level of bacterial toxins in ME/CFS patients. If these toxins are there as Dr Markov states, then this might open a whole new branch of ME/CFS research.

PolyBio has a study which is doing something relevant. They are going to profile a wide array of pathogen-associated proteins in both the blood and cerebrospinal fluid. Unfortunately for this hypothesis, it looks like they are focusing on viral proteins — I'm not sure if they are including any bacterial proteins in the analysis. I'm unable to find whether the study has already started or if it's still future.

"Two advanced platforms will be used to identify pathogen antibody reactivities and autoantibodies in study participant samples: The SERA platform and rapid extracellular antigen profiling (developed by project team member Dr. Aaron Ring). A benefit of both platforms is that mapping can be performed to determine reactivity to a large number of pathogen proteins simultaneously."

(DEEP PROFILING OF PATHOGEN ANTIBODY REACTIVITIES, IMMUNE FACTORS, AND AUTOANTIBODIES IN ME/CFS BLOOD & CEREBROSPINAL FLUID)

 

[Garz]

its possible there will be some crossover

i think the immune disturbance caused by chronic bacterial infections can suppress the immune function and allow viruses to reactivate

 

[Hip]

PolyBio has a study which is doing something relevant. They are going to profile a wide array of pathogen-associated proteins in both the blood and cerebrospinal fluid.

That's interesting, though as you say, unfortunately PolyBio are only looking at viral proteins. I think PolyBio are not detecting these proteins directly, but are detecting the antibody response against them.



It would be good to have a study measure the antibody response against the toxins produced by the bacteria Dr Markov says are most involved in ME/CFS (Enterococcus, E.coli, Staphylococcus, Klebsiella, etc).

The nearest thing we have to such a study is a 2004 paper by Zachrisson, a colleague of Prof Gottfries in Sweden.

Zachrisson looked at a cohort of Gottfries ME/CFS patients who were following the Gottfries's Staphypan® Staphylococcus toxoid and Staphylococcus cell wall vaccine protocol (a toxoid vaccine is one which stimulates antibodies against the toxins that bacteria produce, as opposed to making antibody against the bacterium itself — though the Staphypan vaccine does both).

Zachrisson found that the ME/CFS patients showing a good clinical response to Staphypan developed high IgG antibodies against Staphylococcus alpha toxin (as well as lipase).

Whereas the antibody response in clinical responders to other Staphylococcus toxins present in the Staphypan vaccine (Staphylococcus enterotoxin A, enterotoxin C and TSST-1) was not particularly elevated.

So this suggests that it is specifically the alpha toxin of Staphylococcus which is playing a significant causal role in ME/CFS.

Interestingly though, Staphylococcus enterotoxin B has been tentatively linked to autoimmune conditions. So this might in part explain why ME/CFS patients often have comorbid autoimmune illnesses.

It would be good to see a similar study look at antibodies to Enterococcus and E.coli toxins in ME/CFS patients, the two most common bacteria Dr Markov finds in the urine of ME/CFS patients.



Perhaps the toxins of bacteria commonly found living in the human body could be linked to a variety of diseases; but because we only have limited powers to detect these toxins, any such toxin-disease associations may not be picked up. There may be a whole host of diseases which are caused in part by bacterial toxins in the blood or in the organs, but we are not aware of this, due to limited abilities to detect these toxins in the body.

For example, autism has long been linked to Clostridia species in the gut; but I don't think many researchers have examined whether it might be the toxins that Clostridia produce which cause the symptoms of autism.

But I just had a quick Google, and came across this recent paper which found that certain Clostridia toxins are linked to the gut symptoms of autism. Interestingly, they did not detect Clostridia the toxins directly, but measured the bacterial genes which make these toxins.