i am wondering sometimes if we are infected with many different microbes, maybe sometimes there is a balance
then we treat one, or go on a abx that treats some, then that makes the others go out of whack, when they were under control before
i think when people have a toxic soup of infections, that is why we are so difficult to treat.
i dont know if this makes any sense or if I am saying it clearly, but maybe there are some studies or research on this?
Posted by tailz (Member # 10014) on :
Absolutely. Just right when I develop some sort of tolerance of or grip on my symptoms, I start a new antibiotic and some other bug seems to flare up.
I really don't think the long-term answer is antibiotics, for this reason.
I think God gave us coinfections because, without them, we would have died of Lyme. Without babesia, I might have die of bartonella. Without bartonella, I might have died of ehrlichia, without ehrlichia, I might have died of...
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by roro: then we treat one, or go on a abx that treats some, then that makes the others go out of whack, when they were under control before
i think when people have a toxic soup of infections, that is why we are so difficult to treat.
I do believe when we treat one and beat it down, the others rear their ugly heads... for sure.
But in no way, do I believe that one microbe kills another.
The infectious soup is INDEED the BIGGEST problem we face.
Posted by Brussels (Member # 13480) on :
Like Lymetutu, I agree.
The microbes already live well in the tiny, almost microscopic tummy of the tick. The soup is already there, if they don't kill each other in such a small microscopic space, why would they do in our bodies?
They, in my opinion, work synergistically. Almost like a symbiotic relation, they need each other to attack the hosts.
I guess the big picture of lyme getting more and more agressive now, is because now ticks come with more and more soup of infections, while before they had mostly only borrelia. Less people fell sick only with borrelia, it seems.
The picture of infections cannot get better, as if the ticks bite some infected animal, they'll continue reproducing in the ticks tummy and then invade the host. There's no coming back (no biting that makes the tick clean, only bites that can make the ticks more and more infected, the soup getting more complex, the attack to the host more efficient).
Now, that the whole body is an ecossystem, yes, I agree. One pathogen may dominate our bodies in comparison to others, but all of them together make our bodies busy trying to kill them.
Each has different guns and mechanisms to keep alive, each needs different treatment, yes, it makes the work for our bodies muuuuuch harder than if we got just one pathogen.
Borrelia and bartonella are the queens of immunosupression. Why? To let the terrain to other critters and kill themselves? Or to make the host so weak that every pathogen wins better?
But you are right, attack one pathogen, when it dies/ go to backstage, the disease changes, other pathogens will dominate the picture. It's like a ballet. But I don't believe they kill each other, on the contrary. They work together to keep the host's immune system downgraded, as much as possible.
Posted by ByronSBell 2007 (Member # 11496) on :
You have to attack all of the infections and the key is= To go after all of them at the same time.
Yeah it's hard on the body and that is alot of die-off, but it has to be done.