You can see rings in the middle of a bunch of red blood cells and some black dots on the outside. Well in the other thread, someone posted about doing their own blood smear and said that when they screwed it up that they got results similar to mine. Which are rings in the middle of the red blood cells and some black dots on the outside.
For those who can read blood slides, does mine look like it is legit, or that the lab screwed up? I'm concerned because ALL of the rings are directly in the middle of the red blood cell.
From the various pics of red blood cells infected with a Babesia species, the Babesia either looks like an X or a little ring at the edge of the inside of the red blood cell.
Though, all of mine are directly in the middle. Does anyone know if certain Babesia species infect the red blood cells in this fashion?
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
Michelle M
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 7200
posted
I would not compare someone doing their own smear to this lab's work. I doubt Dr. F messed up. There are many strains of babesia which manifest themselves differently in red blood cells. I would take it at face value and treat. Hope you're getting better!
Michelle
Posts: 3193 | From Northern California | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
kelmo
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8797
posted
Dr. F did a presentation with his blood smears to our local lyme support group.
He said the "cross" babesia is kinda rare, and the circle or crescent shape is most common.
Hey, I had my blood smear done and it's ABSOLUTELY CLEAN. However, I tested positive on band 41. I've started zithromax and I'm HERXING.
Your blood looks like you are ill. Keep up the good work.
posted
Ok, I'll look at that link. They were saying that I would probably be dead if I really had that large of a Babesia infection in my RBC's.
I do know that he prepared my slides and they sat for a week in a cooler before he ran the test. That is mainly why I was thinking they might have screwed up since they didn't do the test imediatly.
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
northstar
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 7911
posted
I have not read of effects of one week storage, either positive or negative. What did they say of the effect of storage?
When they do antibody testing, it is supposed to be "fresh", i.e. shipped in the beginning of the week. Of course, that does not mean they get to it at the end of the week! I had a blood draw at end of week, and it still came up CDC positive.
First, however, I would talk about this first with your doctor, to see what his opinion is on the storage effects. Maybe with such "stellar" results, there is minimal likelihood that there is no infection.
If they procede to treat, you can always to a follow up later at end of treatment period.
If he/she thinks results are questionable/unreliable:
Perhaps if you ask the lab if they can do a repeat test at reduced cost (citing doctor's comments), to eliminate the possibility of degradation of the sample while being held.
Hindsight (always so perfect): there should have been some communication about the lab tech not being there.
But they cannot anticipate when you are shipping, nor can you anticipate the possibility of this happening, nor when you would have been able to get an authorization for the draw.
Northstar
Posts: 1331 | From hither and yonder | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The lab tech took off for a week because he was caught up on his work. I'm glad he got it before he took off, as I think he is the only one that does the lab there. He did tell me that he prepared it on a slide and stored it before he left.
I'm still going to do the treatment regardless if the results are real or not. I do have a positive IGG. I just figured I'd ask some others what they thought about it who know how to read these things.
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by jasonsmith: Ok, I'll look at that link. They were saying that I would probably be dead if I really had that large of a Babesia infection in my RBC's.
I agree with whoever told you that. Your slide looks very fishy, but what you see there are not artifacts. Call me cynical but I doubt that is your blood, get a second opinion, try another lab or a university, maybe somebody in your family or friends that could help you with the staining.
That's the only lab I know of that does this.
Just curious if you've got experiance with blood smears? Like went to school for it?
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had the same results that you did and after treatment the bart did not show..it was cleared..the babs was knocked down..but I still need to treat.. the test is real.you are lucky that they can test you..with that acurracy..whoever you were talking to is not your friend as they are trying to confuse you..just get treated.. eric
Posts: 593 | From long island ny | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
kelmo
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8797
posted
Oh please, there is no consipiracy.
This is a small office with two doctors (one who treats Lyme and other infections) and one lab tech. Until a year ago, Dr. F, himself, did all the lab work. He oversees all the labs and verifies the results.
When my daughter and I go in for a visit, he has on occasion spreak out our labs (for which we request copies) and we discuss the results.
This lab is not a national lab, it's a local doctor who has taken an enormous load lately with referrals. Some as far away as Isreal and Poland.
With Dr. S now saying he has access to a lab that does this testing, it is continuing to increase the load on the one guy who is doing all the work.
If you have questions about the validity of your lab test, I would call them, or write your concerns. You have a right to know if your bloodwork is accurate.
I'm not benefiting or profiting for defending this doctor, I'm just trying to keep this from running into the same problem Bowen had, and getting him shut down. He's treating us and I'm very happy if he stays a small practice.
Posts: 2903 | From AZ | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regardless, I'm still going through treatment. I do have a positive IGG for Babesia Microti.
I was just curious about these results as some said they look fishy. Though, I guess it doesn't really matter.
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does anyone else have any input regarding the pics?
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
Dave6002
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 9064
posted
This is not a good smear. Some of the red blood cells are definitely deformed and thus there are some artifacts for sure but there might be some real things, just cannot distinguish who is who. If I were you I would ask redo it.
I did my smear when I was very sick and I expected to see some things, but it's very clean. I wonder either because I don't have Babesia or they use a special protocol (patent pending? anybody knows the protocol the use). I suspect it's the latter, cause my symptoms highly suggest I have Bart or Mycoplasm.
I am interesting in the protocol and want to verify it by myself.
Anybody can give off the protocol or some hints?
Posts: 1078 | From Fairland | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
david1097
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 3662
posted
Here's a hint on babesia. If infected, the RBC's become very fragile and as a result some will break during the smear. If over the whole slide there are none that are broken and there is apparently a high level of parasitemia, I myself would be highly sceptical.
You can get a lot of artifacts due to the stain having crystalized as well as the adjustment on the microscope (ie central, ring). Also, you CAN see bartonella on surface of RBC's but you need to know what to look for. They are small stained dots on the surface of the RBC. They are generaly less than .5 uM in diameter and were thought to be INSIDE the RBC. Electron micrographs show that they are in fact on the surface and pit the surface at the point of attachment so that they look like they are inside.... So, If the stain was properly filtered and the correct stain was used then the pictures could be interpreted as listed.
The rings right in the middle are suggestive of the normal contour of the RBC BUT there are some infections that seem to like to go here.... still there would be expected that at least some would be in the annulus space of the RBC....
There is a lot of information on babesia and all the other zoonotic infections on the various veterinary pathogology sites on the internet. You might even be able to figure out what tye of babesia you have since there is a quite a variation on the appearance of each type.
Sorry I have not given you a straight answer... Hopefully you can do a bit of your own research then make up your own mind
Posts: 1184 | From north america | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
david1097
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 3662
posted
Dave6002,
Babesia stain is pretty simple. In fact with a phase contrast scope you don't even need stain.
Take a look at the WHO site, they will give field staining proceedures for malaria. Babesia is basically the same proceedure. Also many contries have governemnt sites that discuss malaria staining.
As far as a I know mycoplasma cannot be seen on an optical scope due to the small size.
Posts: 1184 | From north america | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
david1097
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 3662
posted
Jason
One would expect to retain a poitive IgG even after "succesful" treatment. In addition, low levels of parasitemeia (ie low percetnage of infected RBC's) will be very hard to find. At 20% you are generally really really really sick. Apparently even a few percent will cause noticable symptoms when mixed with other infections.
In the veterinary communuty it is an accepted fact that babesia is for life. I, in my own mind am quite sure that this applies to humans also (same as Lyme). The trick is to get to the a point where you can function normally even with the infection and then maintain this level with minimum ongoing treatment. After that you have to try to live as healthy a life as possible so as not to upset the balance that keeps the infections in check.
Posts: 1184 | From north america | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Dave6002
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 9064
posted
Divid, thanks. You've made good points.
In retrospect, I come to the impression that all lyme and its co-infections, are neurological. They mainly attack and damage neurological system, the brain and peripheral neuron fibers.
This can explain a lot of symptoms we have.
So detecting infections in blood might not be so important.
Rather, detecting infections in neurosystem may be more relevant.
Posts: 1078 | From Fairland | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'm not sure if ALL of the rings are in fact Babesia. But I think some of them are. As if you look at the RBC's that are flagged, you can see a dot on the edge of the ring. I've read that is what Babesia looks like.
By the way, I do have a positive IGG for Babesia Microti. So, I say that is what I have.
As said, regardless, I'm still going to treat.
I also have chronic Chlamydia Pneumoniae due to a positive IGG AND IGA.
Posts: 310 | From TN | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic