Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

scopeblog.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 186 posts

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#51

Post by oblib »

smallnamespace wrote: post #23
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but note that they also admit that we only have some indirect suggestions that persistent infection is the cause of PTLDS symptoms: > Many researchers believe that doxycyline's inability to clear the persisters may account for the ongoing symptoms of some Lyme sufferers "Many researchers believe" is not the language you use when you have concrete evidence supporting the claim. To date, no one has been able to cu…

Your evidence bar may be unrealistically high here—Lyme has never been successfully cultured in any context (unless you count xenodiagnosis as a form of culturing).

Well, all he's really doing here is pointing out it's not time to pop the cork on the bottle yet.

That's not the same as saying this work won't help lead to that. We can all hope it does while waiting to know for sure.

I appreciate the additional info and context provided.

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#53

Post by wetpaws »

djsumdog wrote: post #48
vimy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease. >RESULTS: Motile spirochetes identified histopathologically as Borrelia were detected in culture specimens, and these spirochetes were genetically identified as Borreliaburgdorferi by three distinct polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based approaches. Spirochetes identified as Borrelia burgdorferi were cultured from the blood of seven subje…

> Just like they are about the masks for covid-19 What is the CDC saying about masks for covid-19? Are you saying they're not effective or the CDC is downplaying their effectiveness?

CDC plain saying they are not effective and not recommending them

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#54

Post by wetpaws »

lone_post wrote: post #49
vimy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease. >RESULTS: Motile spirochetes identified histopathologically as Borrelia were detected in culture specimens, and these spirochetes were genetically identified as Borreliaburgdorferi by three distinct polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based approaches. Spirochetes identified as Borrelia burgdorferi were cultured from the blood of seven subje…

Did you ever consider that the CDC guidelines for masks were intended to prevent hoarding so that those treating patients on the front lines could access them?

Front line personel and hospitals should've been prepared months if not years in advance.

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#56

Post by thomasmeeks »

James_Henry wrote: post #46
mrfusion wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did we have any reason to think it would work on corona? (I really don’t know)

Yes, it is an antiviral.

It is an anti-parasitic and immune-regulation drug. Not really an antiviral. I guess the theory is that it’d regulate an immune over-response. But I don’t think the science is m showing that to be true in this case.

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#57

Post by cryptogoth »

To me, this is an interesting result for three reasons:

1) it appears to be effective against three main forms of the Borrelia spirochete: the normal corkscrew shape, the round-body cyst, and biofilm (they don't call it by that name, but say "drug-tolerant persisters" whose meaning I'm inferring from rest of the literature).

2) it was approved to be tested in mice, which is a step on the way to human clinical trials. Other results, such as the active compound in honeybee venom, melittin, were only tested "ex vivo" on pigskin at body temperature.

3) it has the potential to work as quickly as antibiotics, and not 9 months to 2 years as many plant-based protocols take. Potentially without killing human gut flora.

There is anecdotal evidence of PTLDS patients who are skilled with phlebotomy being able to culture lyme bacteria from their blood samples after letting them sit for a day or two, something that no conventional blood lab has time to do.

Self-directed guide to blood microscopy to identify lyme borrelia (unverified by me): https://www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=30&m=37...

Videos of spirochetes emerging from red blood cells (unverified by me), please excuse funky beats. This one is a little too horrifying for me to watch, as the bacteria is super creepy-looking. https://howirecovered.com/lyme-disease-under-the-microscope/

Unfortunately, the lack of peer-reviewed results to verify this could mean either this method is not reliably reproducible, or there is no funding / appropriately prestigious or profitable way to pursue this line of research.

It's a question I'm interested in, and would help fund as a citizen scientist. Even without a proposed treatment, the methodology of reliably detecting Lyme borrelia in blood could itself be patented.

I'm very grateful this kind of research continues!

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#58

Post by voldacar »

djsumdog wrote: post #48
vimy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease. >RESULTS: Motile spirochetes identified histopathologically as Borrelia were detected in culture specimens, and these spirochetes were genetically identified as Borreliaburgdorferi by three distinct polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based approaches. Spirochetes identified as Borrelia burgdorferi were cultured from the blood of seven subje…

> Just like they are about the masks for covid-19 What is the CDC saying about masks for covid-19? Are you saying they're not effective or the CDC is downplaying their effectiveness?

Weeks ago the CDC lied, saying that masks aren't effective and that the general public shouldn't wear them. They did this ostensibly to keep the existing mask supply available only to medical workers. Needless to say, if they're ineffective for the general public, they're ineffective for doctors and nurses. And so people saw through the bullshit

Re: Lyme disease bacteria eradicated by new drug in early tests

#59

Post by rendall »

lone_post wrote: post #49
vimy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease. >RESULTS: Motile spirochetes identified histopathologically as Borrelia were detected in culture specimens, and these spirochetes were genetically identified as Borreliaburgdorferi by three distinct polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based approaches. Spirochetes identified as Borrelia burgdorferi were cultured from the blood of seven subje…

Did you ever consider that the CDC guidelines for masks were intended to prevent hoarding so that those treating patients on the front lines could access them?

A public entity, whose stated mission is to provide timely and accurate information to the public, actually lies to the public in order to influence some third-hand outcome, such as less hoarding: a net positive?

I would argue no, not a net positive at all. To start, nearly everyone now distrusts the CDC (and WHO) to deliver accurate information.

Post reply on HN