Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Medical topics with questions, information and discussion related to Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases.
duncan
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed 5 Sep 2012 18:48

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by duncan » Sat 5 Nov 2016 20:56

Henry, you have a faculty for non-sequiturs.

Let me share something with you. I have communicated with research leaders from both sides of the Lyme debate. I've talked to many patients as well. Clinicians, too. Yet I think the single greatest influence, in terms of convincing me I have Lyme and other TBD's, are the writings, and the PR shenanigans - and gross mischaracterizations of the Borrelia patient community - generated by many of the same people who have churned out the dogma to which you appear so devoted.

Yes, Henry, it's your buddies and their ilk, that have swayed me. :D

Henry
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu 10 Nov 2011 18:49

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by Henry » Sat 5 Nov 2016 21:30

Then you must know what to do about it.

duncan
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed 5 Sep 2012 18:48

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by duncan » Sat 5 Nov 2016 22:03

Well, I have some ideas. A big one early on would entail firing a whole lot of people in some cushy govt gigs and high-profile university slots - only I suppose tenure would get in the way a bit.

Henry
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu 10 Nov 2011 18:49

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by Henry » Sat 5 Nov 2016 23:55

Duncan: That would be a childish reaction, unlikely to help anyone. Maybe we have a communication problem. If you have been listening carefully to what all the people you mentioned had to say -- especially the patients-- then you should have acquired some wisdom that would be most helpful to people like you. I assume someone like you, who strongly advocates that we listen to the patients, must have done a significant amount of listening. I assume you don't have a Lyme related hearing problem. So, based on what you've heard, you should be in a good position to tell us how to determine-- for sure -- that you really have Lyme disease, and not some other medical condition with similar symptoms. You ought to have gathered relevant information in that regard with all the listening you've done. So, tell us.

duncan
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed 5 Sep 2012 18:48

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by duncan » Sun 6 Nov 2016 0:26

What on Earth are you talking about? Do you actually read what I and others write? Do you understand we are bewildered and frightened and angry because not only have we not made any progress in 25 years in conclusively diagnosing Bb in everyone stricken, but we've come to a similar screeching halt in our ability to eradicate it in an unacceptably significant portion of those infected? Henry, are you ok?

As for helping definitively determine if someone has Lyme, hopefully the Ceres Nanotrap will prove to be a big step in the right direction.

nnecker
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2012 22:57

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by nnecker » Sun 6 Nov 2016 0:30

He can't Henry,just like Migs can't determine for sure that he has an active Lyme infection.

Henry
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu 10 Nov 2011 18:49

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by Henry » Sun 6 Nov 2016 14:01

Duncan: Let me try once again. Pay close attention now. I too have spoken to many patients who have spent enormous sums of money and seen several LLMDs after being told that they have Lyme disease and that this or that unorthodox therapy will cure them. All were disappointed with the results. I also have learned that the majority of such individuals were either self-diagnosed or falsely diagnosed for Lyme disease. Once they discover that they have a thyroid problem, vitamin B12 deficiency, or some other non-infection medical condition. Once diagnosed and treated properly, the result is significant improvement in their health. This prompt many to become ANGRY enough to sue their LLMD and then speak out against Lyme disease activists organizations that spread false and misleading information about Lyme disease that only serves to ensnare others into the same trap. So, that is a large portion of what I hear when I listen to patients. They soon and painfully come to the realization that they have been victimized by being treated for a disease (Lyme disease) that they don't have.

There is nothing wrong with the currently used 2-tier testing procedure as indicated by the Schrieffer publication that I posted previously. What is wrong is that when the results are negative for someone who has convinced themselves that they have Lyme disease, the test is no good. Hence, there is a need for such people to seek a new test to prove that they REALLY have Lyme disease.

Since you are unwilling to accept the advice of experienced and accomplished experts on Lyme disease, they all are wrong and must be fired. Now do you really believe that ALL of these distinguished investigators at the CDC, FDA, NIH, and universities can ALL be wrong? Sounds to me like someone with a mental problem. The odds are more likely that YOU are very wrong but will not acknowledge the fact. To be sure, you are entitled to your own opinions. But, please don't use them to harm others who are seeking constructive and rational solutions to their problems. You confuse more than clarify the issues.

duncan
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed 5 Sep 2012 18:48

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by duncan » Sun 6 Nov 2016 14:29

Oh, I never said I would fire ALL of them; just some.

So, let's reduce this down to some basics. Again you repeat that "there is nothing wrong with the currently used 2-Tier testing procedure..." Then you and I agree I have Lyme disease.

Now, can the current 2T generate false negatives? For instance, can someone test positive on the ELISA, and only four bands positive on the WB IgG, and yet still have Lyme? Or even negative on the ELISA and never even get to the WB and still have Lyme? If yes, could you venture an estimate as to how many such errors are generated annually?

Henry, I understand there are people diagnosed with Lyme that do not have it. I also understand there likely are people told they do not have Lyme that do. The goal here, diagnostically, is to reduce that discordance as much as possible, if not eliminate it all together. Accordingly, seeking better metrics can be a GOOD thing, yes? For everybody?

Another basic: If people are sick, regardless of whether they have Lyme or not, it is a good thing to acknowledge that and not dismiss or minimize their maladies, agreed? This is an essential first step, yes?

You seem to want to make this a story of absolutes, when it has never been that. It may be closer to the old 80/20 rule, although that is admittedly just shorthand borrowed from other technologies and areas. So, if you will grant me that little device, it is the 20% that worries me. Ok, does this mean a majority of that 20% have persistent post-treatment Bb (along with maybe other TBD's), and not, say, a corrupted immune system causing those symptoms? I cannot say definitively, and neither can you. Which is why we need better diagnostics, imo. But marginalizing that 20% is not the way to go about it; nor is ignoring the deficits in the current diagnostic scheme.

Discussions coming out of researchers like Navioux and Lipkin and Aucott and Lewis are SO promising because they are just that: discussions from varying perspectives that help move us as forward. By their nature, they suggest that we haven't got it right yet, and we need to press on with new research endevours.

Another thought: I hope neither of us is unintentionally equivocating here. I think it most accurate to use Borrelia instead of Lyme, and I readily confess I use the terms interchangeably. Borrelia is more accurate and safer, as it is definitionally broader and can help circumvent the strain/species issues to a large degree.

I apologize for the disruption to this thread. It does tie back into the Ceres test, albeit in a round about fashion.

Henry
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu 10 Nov 2011 18:49

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by Henry » Sun 6 Nov 2016 16:08

Duncan: Although all laboratory tests -- no matter how good they are-- have a degree of experimental error associated with them. In the case of 2-tier testing for Lyme disease, such error is rather small as this recent review indicates (see data in Table) : http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/22/7/pdfs/15-1694.pdf .

As I have noted before, although one may have been diagnosed correctly as having Lyme disease and treated by the recommended protocol, serum antibody levels are not an indication of cure since one is likely to remain seropositive for a long period of time after the infection has been cured. That is the result of previous exposure, rather than active infection. In such cases, depending on the frequency of Lyme disease in a given area, a physician might re-treat with a second round of oral antibiotics. However, even then, the patient may still remain seropositive. This is most likely because Borrelia posses as many as 20 different adhesins/integrins that enable intact dead Borrelia or their cellular remnants to stick tenaciously to matrix and other tissue where they can still stimulate the immune system to continue to make antibodies, even though there is no active infection. This situation is by no means unique for patients with Lyme disease. It applies to other infectious diseases as well, e.g., influenza, pneumococcal infections, salmonella and shigella infections and several others.

Should re-treatment not result in the elimination of such residual symptoms, one ought to seriously consider other causes for such symptoms or treat them symptomatically as some physicians do. I think you will agree that to continue to treat for Lyme disease with no evidence of an active infection is both irrational and bad medicine.

I too agree that the term Borreliosis is preferable to Lyme disease which has always been defined historically as a tick borne infection caused by Borrelia burgdorferi. The definition of Lyme disease presented by Horowitz in his book is without foundation. His shot-gun approach to dealing with his newly defined multisystemic disease, with no supporting data to prove benefit or safety, is highly unorthodox to say the least. It starts with a consideration of various co-infecting tick-borne agents which, although they may be carried by ticks are found in only a small percentage of cases of patients with correctly diagnosed Lyme disease; there is published evidence to support that. It culminates with a consideration of environmental heavy metal toxicity, once again with no supporting evidence for such a claim. And then there are the costs of his unproven therapeutic approaches, that surely must be considerable ! No one should believe or defend such a quack who clearly is making money off Lyme disease and its promotion.

One last point that has to do with laboratory testing. IGenex claims that their 2-tier testing procedure is more sensitive that that recommended by the CDC because they use ligands derived from a different clinical isolate, B. burgdorferi strain 129. However, their Western blots show no bands that are not found in Western blots developed with B. burgdorferi B31 ligands. The same bands that appear in both cases. The main difference is that, in the case of the criteria that they use to interpret the results, they elect to use fewer bands (as few as 4 some of which are not relevant for the diagnosis of Lyme disease) rather than the 6 recommended in the CDC criteria. for IgG Western blots. Most likely this is due to the high percentage of false positives one obtains using such a liberal procedure, rather than greater sensitivity. They offer NO published peer reviewed data to support their liberal criteria, except for a rather uninformative news letter published in a trade journal. No wonder they are concerned and worried about the FDA's new regulations concerning the LDTs. Their tests are not likely to be approved, thereby resulting in the loss of a considerable amount of money.

duncan
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed 5 Sep 2012 18:48

Re: Anyone know the latest on the Ceres Nanotrap

Post by duncan » Sun 6 Nov 2016 16:22

Cool, good discussion points (although the Horowitz quack thing was unnecssary).

Question:Assuming you were a clinician, what would you do with a patient who shows some evidence of a Lyme infection, and who does better while on abx, and declines precipitously when taken off? Where theory and practicality diverge? I appreciate as a clinician you might think the infection continues, or the infection has been eradicated but the abx provides an antinflammatory effect - nevertheless, the regimen does help the patient; as a clinician, what would you do?

Hey, does Imugen use B31?

Post Reply