Dr Markov CBIS Theory of ME/CFS - General Discussion

[GlassCannonLife]

Water should be boiled before introduction into the dipslide as water does usually contain bacteria and other live things in small quantities. Its one of the reason cpap users are recommended to use distilled water and the main substitute is a 0 TDS filtered water that is also boiled.

I shall set up a control today.

Yeah that's why I said to use either water for injection or sterile saline. This should be interesting though! Please share the images when you are done

 

[GlassCannonLife]

That is a good plan, though maybe out energies should be directed at making ME/CFS researchers aware of this urine dysbiosis findings of Dr Markov, so that they can conduct and publish a replication study. That should have more impact that an informal study conducted on PR.

Yeah that would be ideal. I didn't mean for us to do it as a study just to have a more reliable dataset if we are thinking of committing years and thousands of dollars to the treatment.

It would maybe take a month or two to get 5-10 samples or control and ME/CFS in this way, and review and scoring would take 5 min at most per scorer.

Even if we manage to convince a research group, it will probably take them at least a year to get it done. And that's assuming that they would even want to replicate a relatively low impact study (so even lower impact) and go through human ethics approval, recruitment, fund the consumables, analyse the data, write everything up and then submit to potentially multiple journals if it gets rejected by any..

 

[Hufsamor]

I have planned to test my husband and myself.
I consider my husband as healthy, but he has diabetes 2, adhd and high colestesrol.
Would it still be ok to use him as a healthy test person?
Are any of those conditions linked to cbis, according to dr markov?

 

[Hip]

I consider my husband as healthy, but he has diabetes 2, adhd and high colestesrol.
Would it still be ok to use him as a healthy test person?

Google tells me that diabetes raises the risk of UTIs, so probably not the best of healthy controls in this context.

 

[Hufsamor]

Right. I guess I’ll test him anyway, but keep that in mind when I read the results.

 

[Hip]

And that's assuming that they would even want to replicate a relatively low impact study.

What interests me more is Dr Markov's finding of severe levels of bacterial toxins in the blood of most ME/CFS patients. This is a finding that I think independent research groups might want to look into.

The bacteria these toxins come from tend to correspond to the bacterial species found in the urine. So it is these two things seen together that strengthen Dr Markov's theory.

The measurement of blood bacterial toxin levels was conducted by an independent lab in the Ukraine, but there appear to be no comparable bacterial toxin tests elsewhere. I don't know much about it, but I believe this is because it is difficult to detect the proteins of bacterial toxins.

While we have developed cheap and efficient methods to detect and identify the most minute amounts of genetic material in the blood (like PCR methods), I don't think there are any comparable means of identifying proteins.

Thus it occurs to me that medical science has a blind spot when it comes to studying the association between bacterial toxins and chronic disease. There could be many common chronic diseases in which these toxins play a role, but we would not know about it, because of the difficulty in measuring levels of bacterial toxins in patients.

Take autism for example, which has been linked to Clostridia species in the gut: could it be that the toxins these bacteria might release into the bloodstream are playing a role in autism? The idea that pathogens like viruses and bacteria might cause chronic disease is nothing new, and almost all chronic diseases have been linked to various pathogens.

But the idea that the toxins released by these pathogens might cause or contribute to chronic disease is far less researched — I expect because these toxins are hard to detect. So there is a bigger picture here: not only might ME/CFS be potentially caused by bacterial toxins, but these toxins may be playing important roles in many other diseases, but this medical technology blind spot we have prevents us from detecting this.

Four different ME/CFS research groups have noticed there is "something in the serum" of ME/CFS patients which is toxic to cellular energy metabolism, but they don't know what it is. They have not been able to isolate this toxin from the blood of ME/CFS patients. Well, maybe they should be looking to see if it is a bacterial toxin.

 

[GlassCannonLife]

What interests me more is Dr Markov's finding of severe levels of bacterial toxins in the blood of most ME/CFS patients. This is a finding that I think independent research groups might want to look into.

The bacteria that these toxins in the blood come from also tend to correspond to the bacterial species found in the urine. So it is these two things seen together that strengthen Dr Markov's theory.

The measurement of bacterial toxin levels was conducted by an independent lab in the Ukraine, but there appear to be no comparable bacterial toxin tests elsewhere. I don't know much about it, but I believe this is because it is difficult to detect these proteins of bacterial toxins.

While we have developed cheap and efficient methods to detect and identify the most minute amounts of genetic material in the blood (like PCR), I don't think there are any comparable means of identifying proteins.

Thus it occurs to me that medical science has a blind spot when it comes to studying the association between bacterial toxins and chronic disease. There could be many common chronic diseases in which these toxins play a role, but we would not know about it, because of the difficulty in measuring levels of bacterial toxins in patients.

Take autism for example, which has been linked to Clostridia species in the gut: could it be the toxins these bacteria might release into the bloodstream which are playing a role in autism? The idea that pathogens like viruses and bacteria might cause chronic disease is nothing new, and almost all chronic diseases have been linked to various pathogens.

But the idea that toxins released by these pathogens might cause or contribute to chronic disease is far less researched — I expect because these toxins are hard to detect. So there is a bigger picture here: not only might ME/CFS be potentially caused by bacterial toxins, but these toxins may be playing important roles in many diseases, but this medical technology blind spot we have prevents us from detecting this.

Four different ME/CFS research groups have noticed there is "something in the serum" of ME/CFS patients which is toxic to cellular energy metabolism, but they don't know what it is. They have not been able to isolate this toxin from the blood of ME/CFS patients. Well, maybe they should be looking to see if it is a bacterial toxin.

That's very interesting. I think we may as well pitch the idea to research groups, we just can't expect anything useful to come from it for some time. Do you have the paper where they independently tested the toxins in the blood? I'd love to check it out

 

[Hip]

Do you have the paper where they independently tested the toxins in the blood? I'd love to check it out

I have a copy of that paper, I can PM you with it. It's very long and wordy though. If you look at my Markov theory summary post, in the section entitled "Analysis of the Blood of CBIS Patients for Toxic Bacterial Proteins", it summarizes some of the findings of that Ukrainian toxin test paper.

Apart from the astonishing fact that 81% of 818 ME/CFS patients tested were found to have severe toxemia, and 17% have moderate toxemia via this Ukrainian toxin test, what also grabbed my attention in this paper was the correlation between the toxins found in the blood, and the bacteria found in the urine.

Here are the bacterial toxins found in the blood of CBIS patients:

• Enterococcus faecalis — in 50% of patients
• Escherichia coli — 12% of patients
• Enterococcus faecalis + Escherichia coli (both together) — 27%
• Staphylococcus aureus or Staphylococcus haemolyticus — 6%
• Klebsiella pneumonia — 4%
• Pseudomonas aeruginosa — 1%

And here are some of the bacterial species typically found in the urine of CBIS patients:

• Enterococcus + Escherichia coli in 93% of patients
• Enterococcus — 37%
• Escherichia coli — 25%
• Staphylococcus — 10%
• Klebsiella — 9%
• Streptococcus — 5%

As you can see, there is a correlation between these.

(I am not quite sure about how the percentages add up for Enterococcus and E. coli in the second list; that data was taken from this post by Dr Oleg Markov).

 

[godlovesatrier]

Dip slides have arrived, took my first sample today

 

[godlovesatrier]

So not sure how long the bacteria really take to appear. I took my first dipslide without cleaning the area - left it in the urine for about 10 minutes and then incubated at 37 degrees. Overnight I didn't really notice any bacteria growing, might be some on the red part of the slide but it's way too soon to tell.

Also the pale gel substance on no 3 has basically melted away...no idea when this happened but it's disappeared.

I took a sample today after cleaning the area and the gel on 3 has not melted away.

I guess it might be a week before I can see anything. I've been leaving the caps lightly on the bottles although not sure this will do much for oxygen distribution, so I've opened them and exposed them to the air a few times each day.

 

[BrightCandle]

As far as the process for this goes it should be 30 seconds in the urine, dump the urine, then seal the tube and leave it for 24 hours at 37C. You will then see spots on the green side, or not. Typically its taken 2-3 tests for people to get results they don't appear on every one. If you do room temperature it could take 2-3 times as long but just leave it sealed.

My water control is negative, no growth,

 

[godlovesatrier]

Cool, well I have plenty of bottles for tests haha! So covered in that respect.

 

[godlovesatrier]

Ok so it's 2 days now since I took my first sample and there's definitely bacteria growing on the no 1 growing medium. However this sample (sample no 1) I did without first cleaning the area.

Sample no 2 appears to be showing bacterial growth too on growing medium no 1 but it's impossible to tell yet if that was there beforehand.

I can't really see any growth on no 2 or 3, but growing medium no 3 melted off sample no 1, only sample no 2 still contains that growing medium.

So what does bacteria growing on the no 1 growing medium mean @Hip ? I did try to find it in past posts but no luck.

I'll take pictures once it's easier to see. I continue to incubate 24 hours a day at 37 degrees.

I will get my gf to do a control as well at some point.

Thanks,

 

[Hip]

I took my first dose of Dr Markov's Staphylo-Primavac Staphylococcus vaccine yesterday, which I injected under the lower corner of my shoulder blade (scapula), as per the instructions.

This is a vaccine that Dr Igor Markov has developed and manufactures himself, and his patent describes this vaccine as being superior to other Staphylococcus vaccines on the market, in particular because it has a stronger immunological effect, and unlike other Staphylococcus vaccines, has no risk of allergic reactions (in fact it actually has an hypoallergenic effect).

Staphylo-PrimaVac contains 15 different strains of Staphylococcus aureus, 3 strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus, and 3 strains of Staphylococcus epidermidis. So it has a broad-spectrum coverage of Staphylococcus species and sub-species.

I did not notice much after the first injection; no side effects or adverse effects at all (apart from some armpit odor the following day, which might be related to a bacterial die-off).

Once I finish this course of 7 Staphylococcus vaccine inoculations, there is a 3 week break, and I then move on to the autovaccine in about 6 weeks time. The autovaccine is custom made for me, and contains my own inactivated bacteria, to train the immune system to target these bacteria. This vaccine targets the three bacteria found in my urine (so it contains three autovaccines in one).

Then once I finish the course of autovaccine, after another break of one month, I move onto a polyvalent urological vaccine, which targets many of the most common UTI bacteria).

Finally, after polyvalent urological vaccine, after a break of one month, I return for a second course of the Staphylococcus vaccine.


I am also prescribed a number of supportive medications, which I need to buy myself from online pharmacies.


Note however that each patient is different, and Dr Markov prescribes a set of vaccines which is customized for the patient. So other CBIS ME/CFS patients may not get the exactly same treatment I am getting.

 

[bensmith]

How long did it take for them to respond to your email, if you remember?

 

[Hip]

How long did it take for them to respond to your email, if you remember?

Within a few days I think.

But it's probably best to first check that you are positive for bacteria in your urine using the Markov urine culture, because this helps demonstrate that you may be a CBIS ME/CFS patient. This involves buying some dipslides and testing your urine in the way described in this thread. If no bacteria can be isolated, then autovaccines cannot be made.

 

[godlovesatrier]

Nice one @Hip - sorry if I missed it but how did you get the autovaccines in the end? Or did they just courier them to you?

 

[godlovesatrier]

Ok so little update from me, here is how my second dipslide looks (the one after I cleaned). As you can see it only shows one bacterial strain, not sure if this invalidates me for the purposes of the treatment? Welcome to comments:

This is the only spot of bacteria on the entire no. 1 growth medium. According to the chart on google, this means little to no bacterial growth - I assume it means in the kidneys in this context:

Considering I proved that oat bran causes neutropenia in myself (I did blood tests before and after a 6 week gap where I didn't take any oat bran and my neutrophils leapt by .25 which in my case was the same amount I'd lost in the proceeding 12 weeks.) it's possible the beta glucans were feeding neutrophils which were going after kidney infection. I mean it's totally hypothetical but it's not impossible right?

At any rate I am positive for something, but there is definitely nothing on no 2 or 3 growing mediums, just no 1 and even then only one strain of something.

As for the first agar which I took without washing the area first, this was full of all sorts of strains of bacteria - which is to be expected!

 

[bensmith]

@Hip ok thanks. Yeah i should get the dips in the mail within a couple days. I reached out friday/saturday to the different emails on site just waitintg for response. Odds are in my favor for the bacteria and with ukraine possibly becoming unstable from russia i decided to pull the trigger and write the email now.

 

[Cipher]

Ok so little update from me, here is how my second dipslide looks (the one after I cleaned). As you can see it only shows one bacterial strain, not sure if this invalidates me for the purposes of the treatment? Welcome to comments:

On the right side of the picture the agar seems to be a little yellow. CLED agar turns yellow when the pH decreases because of lactose fermenting bacteria. Are you sure there aren't any colonies on the right side of the agar that's turning it yellow?