TNT
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 42349
posted
The scientific back and forth here on this thread about testing is great. But the personal attacks (mainly one way) is pretty low. And I'm being euphemistic!
Very disappointing. So unprofessional.
It literally makes me wonder what coinfections are out of control.
This forum shouldn't be a place where people have to personally defend themselves. If there is legitimate concern and evidence of a troll (where one has been found out), that should be taken to the moderators. Direct accusations do not make the forum an enjoyable place.
Posts: 1308 | From Eastern USA | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Oh, and Screen Name Miyamotoi, I'm wondering why you chose the name "Miyamotoi", when you appear to be such a C6 fan. Were you unaware that the C6 Elisa is totally incapable of detecting Borrelia miyamotoi?
What is the point besides just being mean spirited to criticize a screen name choice based on a test detection capability?
I've yet to find any good sources that discuses whether the C6 detects Bm. It does have the advantage of detecting a wider Bb species when it works.
That is a good thing since the current CDC 2T is based on single B31 antigen set and is known to miss European and other species. So if you are unlucky enough to get Bg or Ba or any of a dozen species, the C6 might catch it. The CDC 2T won't.
And US doctors don't have any way I've found of arranging a European test easily, so the C6 as an adjunct could help in a thorough analysis.
Of course it has its problems. They all do. The problem is in part how doctors interpret results with any negative = negative.
Why stretch to find such a weird way of criticizing someone just because of my experience with a positive C6 like Duncan.
Please lighten up as I believe Duncan is one of the good guys helping and just because we both tested positive on the C6 means no ore than that.
The choice of screen names was based on the comical process of the realization its a big problem the mainstream dropped the ball on over and over. It has nothing to do with a test I was positive on.
There are a lot of people struggling including myself and Duncan and are on the good side.
Its not helpful to go beyond giving your views rather than attack Duncan over and your stretch to criticize my screen name???
Please lighten up. I'm sure the mainstream is smiling when they see us bicker. Can't you see its not helpful beyond giving your views and experience.
Posts: 51 | From California | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged |
"I've yet to find any good sources that discuses whether the C6 detects Bm."
What about this:
" Of the 36 B. miyamotoi sensu lato–seropositive study participants without a clinical history of Lyme disease within the previous 2 years, ... 6 (16.7%) had test results positive for C6 ELISA."
( Krause et al 2014)
So over 83% of Borrelia miyamotoi-infected patients were negative on the C6 elisa.
And the above was published by CDC in their EID journal, based on the work of a team including many of the Denialists actually pushing the C6 as a good test, like Wormser!
"Miyamotoi", you also suggested that the C6 might somehow be better at detecting European strains.
What in God's name gave you that impression?
Have you not read the stats I've quoted from Britain, where Garinii is supposed to be far commoner than Bb sensu stricto, and where we use the C6 exclusively as our first tier of the 2T test.
The C6 eliminated over 90% of British people tested, putting us at the BOTTOM of the league tables for Lyme incidence in Europe?
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm assuming Krause is Peter Krause? He seems to be the IDSA/YaleHarvardHopkins miyamotoi point man.
You'll recognize his name from 2006 Guidelines.
He is/was also their Babesia maven. I actually spoke to him on the phone once about my possibly having Babesia, and the long-term implications, even with treatment.
I never did receive treatment, but not because of him.
Posts: 228 | From Unitied States | Registered: Jul 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyme diagnostic tests are like electronic voting machines--- very easy to manipulate by any dark force that has the means and motive to set an agenda and control the process..
Personally I think that, given the politics and nature of the coverup regarding diagnostic tests, Liveblood microscopy is the best way to track a Lyme infection -- at least at this point in time. Microscopy also shows intracellular infection.
Experienced Live Blood Microscopists have noticed that once the number of live spirochetes they see in blood is down to less than 5 in one hour, most people do not have symptoms! This is a very useful observation.
Also, why not use MacDonald's amyloid plaque staining to test for probable lyme biofilm in Live blood to determine the extent of biofilm infiltration?
Personally I think diagnostic testing is a giant red herring that will just delay the development of a cure and divert resources.. I don't waste my money on it anymore, and my doctor (the president of ILADS) no longer takes my insurance.
If the process of approving diagnostic tests were fair, it would be much better than Live blood microscopy, but since the process isn't fair and is shrouded in lies and deceit--- we need to stop putting endless energy into it.
Lets just call a spade a spade--- liars have created these tests and at least right now, control the approval process.
Trying to make things fair is admirable, but what we need is a CURE first--- and then-- maybe more accurate tests, based on scientific truth----- and not junk science lies.
Eventually the liars will shrivel back into their hidey holes.
My diagnostic tests have always been basically negative, yet I have had three bullseye rashes over the years and my symptoms got much better on antibiotics, and then reverted once I was off antibiotics..
The current diagnostic tests are completely unreliable-- and no new approved test is likely to be accurate based on the politics of the ongoing Lyme coverup.
Key people on these committees have probably taken large bribes (the $600,000 suitcase). The process is corrupt.
We should just put our energy into financing the finding of cures first -- this should be our priority as sick people.
There are literally thousands of natural plant based compounds that can and will cure--- meaning we don't even have to go through the corrupt FDA process if we look at natural plants.
Plants do not have a real immune system--- so they rely on chemicals to deter parasites, biofilm and bacteria.
How nice plants are for us........
Posts: 696 | From New York | Registered: Aug 2006
| 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!
![[hi]](graemlins/hi.gif)
![[group hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[bonk]](graemlins/bonk.gif)
when they see us bicker. Can't you see its not helpful beyond giving your views and experience.
Printer-friendly view of this topic