LymeNet Home LymeNet Home Page LymeNet Flash Discussion LymeNet Support Group Database LymeNet Literature Library LymeNet Legal Resources LymeNet Medical & Scientific Abstract Database LymeNet Newsletter Home Page LymeNet Recommended Books LymeNet Tick Pictures Search The LymeNet Site LymeNet Links LymeNet Frequently Asked Questions About The Lyme Disease Network LymeNet Menu

LymeNet on Facebook

LymeNet on Twitter




The Lyme Disease Network receives a commission from Amazon.com for each purchase originating from this site.

When purchasing from Amazon.com, please
click here first.

Thank you.

LymeNet Flash Discussion
Dedicated to the Bachmann Family

LymeNet needs your help:
LymeNet 2020 fund drive


The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations.

LymeNet Flash Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» LymeNet Flash » Questions and Discussion » General Support » How CDC Mislead US Senators on Culture

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: How CDC Mislead US Senators on Culture
elara
Member
Member # 41819

Icon 1 posted      Profile for elara     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The CDC's Johnson wrote the paper that mislead the 5 US Senators who pushed the FDA to begin regulating LDT tests. They will almost certainly go after IgneneX and ALS.

Here is the story of how Johnson left off critical evidence, failed to do a proper contamination analysis and misused irrelevant contamination in a confirmation test or possibly at a third party sequencing lab in Alabama. She implied it was in the actual culture when it was not. Its not the first time the CDC has been dishonest but misleading 5 US Senators deserves they be told.

When the evidence Johnson omitted is incorporated with a proper analysis of the contamination, its clear the culture looks ok. But now that paper has led to an MMWR, Medscape articles, 5 US Senators who used it finally to pressure the FDA to regulate LDTs, especially those for Lyme.

The real truth

http://puurelyrandom.wordpress.com/

Posts: 53 | From Jupiter | Registered: Aug 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
susank
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 22150

Icon 1 posted      Profile for susank     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks.

My test results from ALS stated positive growth using polyclonal antibody for Bb.

I now understand that to mean I could have Bb, Bg or Ba.

(Had always assumed I had Bb - never really considered Bg or Ba - and cannot remember if treatment is different).

No mention of monoclonal testing on my sample.

I have to assume patients' samples are not tested
monoclonal and polyclonal???

--------------------
Pos.Bb culture 2012
Labcorp - no bands ever
Igenex - Neg. 4 times
With overall bands:
IGM 18,28,41,66 IND: 23-25,34,39
IGG 41,58 IND: 39
Bart H IGG 40

Posts: 1613 | From Texas | Registered: Aug 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
elara
Member
Member # 41819

Icon 1 posted      Profile for elara     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Polyclonal can mean any of the three. If monoclonal is positive, its Bb. So you ask for the polyclonal if you think you might have any of the 3 species and ask for the monoclonal for Bb. So if you live in Europe, it probably means Ba or Bg. If you live in the US it probably means Bb unless you traveled to Europe or Asia.

Polyclonal is the best choice if you aren't sure or just want the broadest coverage. It binds to all 3 Bb, Ba and Bg.

Posts: 53 | From Jupiter | Registered: Aug 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
susank
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 22150

Icon 1 posted      Profile for susank     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks and thanks also for posting the paper.

Although I cannot figure out who wrote it.

And it was sent to?

Anyway, that article is about the only thing I have seen past months in regards to the ALS test.

I guess I have been expecting statements from ALS and the CDC.

The info in the article sure appears to say the culture test is valid.

--------------------
Pos.Bb culture 2012
Labcorp - no bands ever
Igenex - Neg. 4 times
With overall bands:
IGM 18,28,41,66 IND: 23-25,34,39
IGG 41,58 IND: 39
Bart H IGG 40

Posts: 1613 | From Texas | Registered: Aug 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | LymeNet home page | Privacy Statement

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3


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, NJ 08534 USA


| Flash Discussion | Support Groups | On-Line Library
Legal Resources | Medical Abstracts | Newsletter | Books
Pictures | Site Search | Links | Help/Questions
About LymeNet | Contact Us

© 1993-2020 The Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
Use of the LymeNet Site is subject to Terms and Conditions.