All Posts Tagged With: "borrelia burgdorfer"

Link: http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=20975954&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks

Excerpt:

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To elucidate whether CRASP-5 and
CRASP-3 interact with various human proteins, both borrelial
proteins were immobilized on magnetic beads. Following incubation
with human serum, bound proteins were eluted and separated by
Glycine-SDS-PAGE. In addition to CFH and CFHR1, complement
regulators CFHR2 and CFHR5 were identified as novel ligands for
both borrelial proteins by employing MALDI-TOF. To further assess
the contributions of CRASP-3 and CRASP-5 to complement
resistance, a serum-sensitive B. garinii strain G1 which lacks
all CFH-binding proteins was used as a valuable model for
functional analyses. Both CRASPs expressed on the B. garinii
outer surface bound CFH as well as CFHR1 and CFHR2 in ELISA. In
contrast, live B. garinii bound CFHR1, CFHR2, and CFHR5 and only
miniscute amounts of CFH as demonstrated by serum adsorption
assays and FACS analyses. Further functional analysis revealed
that upon NHS incubation, CRASP-3 or CRASP-5 expressing borreliae
were killed by complement. 
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In the absence of CFH and the presence
of CFHR1, CFHR2 and CFHR5, assembly and integration of the
membrane attack complex was not efficiently inhibited indicating
that CFH in co-operation with CFHR1,
CFHR2 and CFHR5 supports complement evasion of B. burgdorferi

Full article: http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=20461540&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks

Excerpt:

OBJECTIVE: By using the published incidence of Lyme borreliosis
in endemic regions of the World, and the sensitivity and
specificity data of the best Lyme serological tests, we computed
the positive predictive value of Borrelia burgdorferi antibody
testing. METHODS: The calculation of predictive value was based
on Bayes’ theorem. We also analyzed the frequency distribution of
the specific and non-specific symptoms and complaints of 27,194
patients sent to the Centre for Tick-borne Diseases in Budapest
from 1986 to 2008. RESULTS: This evaluation demonstrated that
practitioners often use Lyme serology in a “trial and error” way,
without any reasonable ground. According to our calculation the
positive predictive value of the best Lyme antibody tests if
applied in this way is <9.1%. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that
the present practice of applying Lyme serological tests may
result in more harm than benefit.
 

While I have the utmost respect for Dr Robert Bransfield, I can’t help but ask the question, “how much of the psychiatric symptoms and aggressiveness could be avoided IF we were to reduce the pathogen and toxin level, especially in those of us exposed to chemicals??

What do we do to reduce those pathogens and toxins? Continued