Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Medical topics with questions, information and discussion related to Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases.
X-member
Posts: 8456
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by X-member » Thu 28 Feb 2013 23:31

From the previous post (hv808ct):
Looking around, I don’t see many frightened members of the medical and scientific communities. Though I suppose many of us might be worried ...
:roll:

Another quote (from the same post):
No, it’s not too difficult to culture B. burgdorferi. It’s just not relevant—right now—to clinical practice.
"right now"? Well, can you tell us when? ;)

TicksSuck
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu 31 May 2012 20:25

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by TicksSuck » Fri 1 Mar 2013 3:05

hv808ct wrote:No one is sitting down to a meal of crow…especially after having spoiled their appetites with a big plate of BS.

Do you mean Borrelia Spirochetes? :D
hv808ct wrote: That plate full of BS was well described in last month’s Medscape.Com article on Burrascano, Sapi and the mysterious Advanced Laboratory Services (http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/778482).
I don't think this medscape article describes the research paper by Sapi which is subject of this thread. The article actually complains that the results had not been subject of a peer-reviewed publication, which is no longer the case. Let's now see if the results can be replicated before jumping to ANY conclusions!
hv808ct wrote:MacDonald’s continued shilling for this crap offers false hope to people who think they have an infection, and millions of dollars to businessmen eager to convince them that they do, which then will put thousands of dollars into the pockets of Lyme quacks willing to treat those “now positively diagnosed.”
Indeed, making unsubstantiated claims is not cool! If some have access to other sources of information, it would be nice to offer explanations with those claims.
hv808ct wrote:No, it’s not too difficult to culture B. burgdorferi. It’s just not relevant—right now—to clinical practice.
No, it's very relevant if indeed it can be done and it can prove infection where we are told none exist.

TicksSuck

Edited to add quote references...
Last edited by TicksSuck on Fri 1 Mar 2013 4:53, edited 1 time in total.

Camp Other
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed 2 Mar 2011 4:32
Contact:

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by Camp Other » Fri 1 Mar 2013 3:44

hv808ct wrote: No, it’s not too difficult to culture B. burgdorferi. It’s just not relevant—right now—to clinical practice.
Why isn't it relevant? And why place a timeframe on it of "right now"?
hv808ct wrote: Looking around, I don’t see many frightened members of the medical and scientific communities. Though I suppose many of us might be worried that some incautious individual will mistake laboratory contamination for a positive blood culture; or declare misdiagnosed illnesses, post-infection tissue damage, or serious psychiatric conditions for mere “neuroses”; or ignore 30+ years of clinical research on the non-infectious nature of post-Lyme sequelae.
What if you are scrupulous in your lab protocols yet still have positive cultures?

What if you do all of the following and still get a positive culture?:
- Use aerosol barrier pipette tips.
- UV-irradiate all workstations used for the setup of master mix preps and PCRs.
- Treat all surfaces and tube racks with a 10% bleach solution.
- Use frequent and careful glove changes.
- Perform DNA extraction, PCR setup, and PCR product analysis in different rooms.
- Use clean systems.
- Use a negative control such as UV-treated, deionized water.
- Do not do bacterial work, etc. during any human DNA extraction.

If your lab has done all of the above and there was oversight on following these steps, then what?

I've seen some critiques (including Worsmer et al's) about animal studies on Bb and sample contamination claims.

What I want to know is how the individuals offering the critique determine whether or not sample contamination occurred just by reviewing the study's paper?

I'm asking this for a lot of people who may also wonder how this is done.

Camp Other
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed 2 Mar 2011 4:32
Contact:

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by Camp Other » Fri 1 Mar 2013 3:56

hv808ct wrote: [...] Though I suppose many of us might be worried that some incautious individual will mistake laboratory contamination for a positive blood culture; or declare misdiagnosed illnesses, post-infection tissue damage, or serious psychiatric conditions for mere “neuroses”; or ignore 30+ years of clinical research on the non-infectious nature of post-Lyme sequelae.
Is it over thirty now?

Can you please tell me what was the turning point - the publication or publications which definitively clinched it that "post-Lyme sequelae" are always non-infectious in nature?

And if this clinching occurred over 30 (!) years ago as you've stated (which takes us back to before 1983 if you are counting from this calendar year 2013), how could so much research be done that settled this causation when B. burgdorferi as the cause of Lyme disease was only announced in 1982?

And also: If this was determined over 30 years ago, then why have the NIH fund research on the PLEASE study in Norway (still recruiting now folks - if you're interested, check out the NIH clinical trials page... Caveat: Don't know if its funding source will be affected by sequester in just a few short hours) and fund research on xenodiagnosis using ticks on patients who have persisting symptoms after being initially treated with antibiotics for Lyme disease?

If it's political, please explain this. If it's for scientific knowledge, explain that. I sit here and keep wondering why - if anyone knew for sure that these persisting symptoms after initial treatment of Lyme disease had a non-infectious cause and were presumed to be autoimmune in nature that, well, SOMEONE would have already done at least one or two preliminary treatment studies on it. (And I mean beyond Lyme arthritis, which has been established - I mean treatment for all the neurocognitive effects.)

How can you even be sure that everyone with persisting symptoms has the same condition, anyway?

User avatar
inmacdonald
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri 13 Jan 2012 22:32

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by inmacdonald » Sat 2 Mar 2013 16:37

Dear Duncan:
Your question about test sensitivity [ and by linkage "specificity" and "predictive value" of both Positive tests
and Negative Test results was covered in detail by Dr. Robert Galen and Dr S. Raymond Gambino in their
classic monograph {written at Columbia while I was a student there and a Resident There}

The book is still available through Amazon; or through interlibrary loan.

Sensitivity - Specificity - Predictive value of A positive test - Predicive value of a Negative test -
are all defined and discussed by two lumninary laborarorians. This monograph has become a "Classic"


___________________________________
Beyond Normality Galen and Gambino.jpg
Galen and Gambino
Beyond Normality Galen and Gambino.jpg (101.62 KiB) Viewed 2468 times

_____________________________________

As for hvo808ct he has never read the Galen and Gambino Monograph
and
conveniently forgets that the
CDC has defined culture positive recovery of Borrelia burgdorferi is Gold Standard Proof.

The 1982 NEJM articles were evidenced by Blood culture recovery of Bb from LB patients.
Are we to discard the NEJM too?

Best,
Alan

Pandora
Posts: 252
Joined: Tue 20 Mar 2012 14:58

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by Pandora » Tue 5 Mar 2013 5:27

You should NOT have to have thousands of dollars worth of tests---1-2 weeks of Doxycycline, the apply a pea size amount of animal wormer paste on palms or between toes or soles of feet and LOOK with a MICRO magnifying glass for the spirochetal fibers enveloped in JUNK DNA to exit, and black DOTS...YOU KNOW THEN YOU HAVE STEALTH they gave you! Esp. easy in the millions of Autism babies suffering their syndromes.
http://www.morgellons-research.org/morg ... oscop3.htm

All you need to say pos. is to produce an exit of Morgellons out of the skin with a pea size of animal wormer paste and look with a micro magnifying glass.

They will be seen to exit in fiber like structures of white, blue, black, and red, as well as black dots.

It may require an antibiotic challenge and I am yet to find someone who suffers a syndrome who does not have it.

Of course the MSM deny its existance because it is not profitable.

Morgellons is nothing more than Spirochetal disease enveloped in Junk DNA and Fungus. Which Kaiser contributed to a tree fungus before dropping the whole thing to decode 100,000 of their employee's and patients DNA.

Morgellons spirochetal prion proteins sharing their genes-- why all those Autism babies and syndromatic cannot tolerate gluten...
http://f1000research.com/articles/2-25/v1

But it NOT just in the skin....
Segmented Filamentous Bacteria in human ileostomy samples after high fiber intake.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23406300

Of course not all labs can have advanced detection like China and France that can even detect GMO before it gets off a ship. But hey that's the America stupid way....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... Ono_2m_8LY

edbo
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat 2 Feb 2013 21:48

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by edbo » Sat 16 Mar 2013 17:08

The ILADS website has a Burrascano presentation about the new culture test:

http://www.ilads.org/ilads_news/2013/cu ... s-testing/

He reports they were "able to obtain positive cultures when as little as ONE Bb organism was added". And "all 48 negative control samples were negative." This sounds very promising.

I am super curious however, has there been any reaction so far to the publication of this testing method (Sapi et al) and to its results? I mean they would really be groundbreaking, in case everything was done correctly.

What is the next step? Does this method need to be verified by independent institutions?

User avatar
inmacdonald
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri 13 Jan 2012 22:32

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by inmacdonald » Sun 17 Mar 2013 15:27

Independent verification of the Advanced Laboratories blood culture Test
Is stated to be underway at:

Maine Medical Center, Portland,Me
UCLA ,California.

I have no documentation about the status of these activities.

Since the published paper provides the recipe for the improved method,
any clinical lab willing to spend the money for setup and manufacture
of the improved medium is immediately enabled to offer an identical test to
mail order patients.

I think that with more labs offering the method, that the Price will
fall dramatically.

From a Legal point of view, a positive blood culture , satisfies CDC Gold standard
criteria for Best laboratory modalitiy for the ratification of a diagnosis of LB.

Insurance coverage should then apply, ---moving forward
and....
Moving ....
in a retrograde manner


That Insurance coverage should apply to the payment for the Cost of
doing the Advanced Labs Blood culture test for all of those who test positive.

The Cost of Lyme Health Care should be shouldered by the Health Insurance Carriers
for all who test positive with this method.

Sobering for Health Insurance Company Actuaries.
Please recall that private Health Insurance Premiums are calculated by the
Health insurance Companies by factoring in UP FRONT a 30% profit margin
on premiums paid in by patients. The dollars actually paid out to providers
[Hospitals and providers] then are divided from the remaining monies received
in premiums.

best,
Alan

edbo
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat 2 Feb 2013 21:48

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by edbo » Sun 17 Mar 2013 21:03

inmacdonald wrote:Independent verification of the Advanced Laboratories blood culture Test
Is stated to be underway at:

Maine Medical Center, Portland,Me
UCLA ,California.

I have no documentation about the status of these activities.

Since the published paper provides the recipe for the improved method,
any clinical lab willing to spend the money for setup and manufacture
of the improved medium is immediately enabled to offer an identical test to
mail order patients.
Excellent news. :D

Thank you for this information, Dr. MacDonald

switters
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun 2 Dec 2012 18:15

Re: Improved Borrelia burgdorferi Blood culture Method

Post by switters » Fri 9 Aug 2013 19:01

inmacdonald wrote:Independent verification of the Advanced Laboratories blood culture Test
Is stated to be underway at:

Maine Medical Center, Portland,Me
UCLA ,California.

I have no documentation about the status of these activities.

Since the published paper provides the recipe for the improved method,
any clinical lab willing to spend the money for setup and manufacture
of the improved medium is immediately enabled to offer an identical test to
mail order patients.

I think that with more labs offering the method, that the Price will
fall dramatically.

From a Legal point of view, a positive blood culture , satisfies CDC Gold standard
criteria for Best laboratory modalitiy for the ratification of a diagnosis of LB.

Insurance coverage should then apply, ---moving forward
and....
Moving ....
in a retrograde manner


That Insurance coverage should apply to the payment for the Cost of
doing the Advanced Labs Blood culture test for all of those who test positive.

The Cost of Lyme Health Care should be shouldered by the Health Insurance Carriers
for all who test positive with this method.

Sobering for Health Insurance Company Actuaries.
Please recall that private Health Insurance Premiums are calculated by the
Health insurance Companies by factoring in UP FRONT a 30% profit margin
on premiums paid in by patients. The dollars actually paid out to providers
[Hospitals and providers] then are divided from the remaining monies received
in premiums.

best,
Alan
Is there any update on this independent verification?

Post Reply