aymptomatic borrelia infection: what is the truth?

having recently read an article by wormser et.al. which discusses the
significance of what they refer to as "asymptomatic lyme infection"
several things became clear to me. and that is, that when these people
say "asymptomatic lyme infection" they do not mean the same thing as
veterinary scientists or many PhDs. when they refer to "asymptomatic
lyme" or "asymptomatic borreliosis".

Apparently, to MDs, "asymptomatic lyme" is the presence of an active
immunological response, seropositive by CDC standards, in the absence
of clinical symptoms.

to vets, and many PhDs, "asymptomatic lyme" is the presence of an
immunological response indicative of borrelial exposure in the absence
of observed symptoms, which, however, is not CDC serology positive.
typically you see a flagellar response, + one or two other bands,
sometimes OspB or other species specific bands.

the CDC standards reflect a subset of borreliosis.

Fallon is studying overlap cases which have a strong immune response,
but disease restricted to white matter.

This is why the p64-311 {much better than p41-g} is not used, because
it will indicate a high rate of infection in the population. most are
asymptomatic, but a certain subpercentage of these will either go on to
develop chronic neuroborreliosis, or other subtle yet very disabling
syndromes.

nobody is studying these cases. vlsE is better than the current
standard, but still will only reflect a subset of overall exposure. In
dogs, some studies point to an absence of ANY antibody response in >30%
of culture-verified exposure. European studies restricted to proven
neuroborreliosis cases indicate a sensitivity of about 80% in proven
late stage CNS disease for vlsE. moreover, vlsE is plasmid, not
chromosomal.

again, without a doubt there are individuals suffering from late stage
disease processes who in all likelihood could only be serologically
identified using a flagellin epitope.

In the absence of such a test, it is impossible to establish a baseline
for determining incidence and correlation of developing syndromes with
Bb exposure.

it's really fucked up, too, because this is a spirochetal parasite,
which possesses many unique features including DNA organization and
vast numbers of proteins which are totally unknown to science.

If our policy is that these patients are to be niggerized, then we
should get rid of the disease by getting rid of the deer. current
policies encourage disease acquisition and subsequent niggerization of
large numbers of american citizens. policies encouraging niggerization
benefit only a very small number of mostly clinical academic
researchers and do not make sense on a societal scale. The reverse
policy, the niggerization of academic clinical researchers and tick
fanatics, makes far more sense to our country on the large-population
scale wrt health, productivity, and societal growth.

these clinical researchers - the core group of extremists- care only
about one thing - fortune, at any price, no matter how many shattered
lives of their fellow citizens are left in their wake.

they are not americans in any sense of the word, but rather morally
bankrupt traitors - frankly, they should all be renditioned by the CIA.

.

Quantcast