Re: Strange Illness For Over One Year, Please Help!


"Susan" <nevermind@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3qndqdFfpiq1U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > This is the quote you gave me.
> > "Yes, and William Golde, an immunologist who left the CDC to do research
> > elsewhere said in a meeting I attended, "there is no clinically
meaningful
> > diagnostic test for Lyme disease."
> >
> > How do you interpret that?
>
> That the tests can not be used as diagnostic tools, only as support for
> a clinical diagnosis. If positive, they're not useless. Sometimes
> they're positive. Often, they're not positive, even PCR, until after
> months of abx treatment.

You provided the quote. You did not provide anything else that "he" said
that even implied what you are saying now.

>
> It's Lyme, not Lyme's; you have heard of it, right? The above is
bull***.
It's a city in the east so what?
Malburg virus comes from the city in Germany.
BK virus, JC virus come from the names of people in which they were first
found. So what?

> > There isn't a bug out there that does not have capabilities that are
well
> > suited for it's host.
>
> You're not very familiar with the special qualities of borrelia in
> evading immune detection?

I have a degree in Microbiology years ago but who cares what or how it
evades immune detection but the researchers?
How does HIV attack the CD4 cells? Is it direct destruction of immune
destruction?
The entire field of parasitology involves immune evading. Legionella grows
in alveolar macrophages by hiding inside them.
Staph produces coagulase a substance that seals itself off by making a wall
of coagulant so white cells can't get at them.
Strep can make hyaluronidase and enzyme that eats at the glue that seals the
cells together so it goes right through between the cells. Hook worm does
the same thing as it goes right through the skin with this enzyme. There are
many parasites who absorb the hosts polyschararides to avoid immune
recognition.
All bugs have properties that make them good parasites by avoiding an immune
response.

>
>
> > I don't know what you mean by that? Financial stake at reporting
results?
>
> You haven't noticed all the concern in medical journals about
> investigators with financial stakes in the products they test then
> report on?

The clinical reporting of results have nothing to do with financial
interests.
You take clinically diagnosed patients and patients with similar diseases
and normal people and see how the test can separate all of them. You then do
parallel testing with other kits in the field in comparing your kit with
them that are already approved. You apply to the FDA for approval.
The labs are blindly tested by accrediting agencies. They send out samples
that they have to test the labs with.
The labs are inspected by other labs in the area for procedures and quality
control practices.
The labs are highly regulated.
Financial interests will always be there from private companies so I don't
know what you mean by that.

Good luck


.