RE: : Mold, fungal treatments?

[Guest guest]

Here is a link to Dr. Cranton's paper about his multiple-anti-fungal

CFIDS treatment, with emphasis on Candida

http://www.drcranton.com/CFIDS.htm#CFIDS%20Paper

Maybe this should be added to the list of protocols for CFIDS.

: Mold, fungal treatments?

Hi ,

Just wondering if you've ever tried a round of antifungal meds or

supps? There's a Dr. Cranton who believes most CFS is fungal

(mold) related, and supposedly has found the only way to treat it

successfully is with triple antifungal therapy for several months

or longer...

d.

>

> Hi Blake.

> " Multifactorial " is almost as confusing as " stress " since some

> people construe it to mean " anything and everything that

contributes

> to an illness " .

> By that model, " AIDS " is clearly multifactorial and yet none of

> these multifactorial contributors can cause AIDS.

> Before HIV was discoverd, Multifactorialism prevailed

> and " stretchologizers " did their best to cook up a syndrome

" stew "

> in which a combination of ingredients, with a dash of perverted

> lifestyle and deviant behaviors thrown in could result in a

> devastating new illness.

> Like psychologizing, the multifactorial model has failed so

many

> times that unless there is a clear reason for using it, I believe

> that people need to concentrate on determining " what

changed " rather

> than focusing on all the known factors that DIDN'T.

> I DO believe that CFS consists of multiple factors, even that

the

> Incline Village subset is an end result of a specific pathway

that

> branched OUT from a common denominator.

> I believe that this common denominator will be found in the

> genetic " flipping of the switch " initiated by specific toxins -

> instead of the model proposed by " toxic overload " .

> -

This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with

each other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any

treatment discussed here, please consult your doctor.

_____

[Guest guest]

Could you define " triple antifungal therapy " for mold. Or refer to a web

site please. I would really like to be on top of the mold season. I have

invested in a Santa Fe dehunmidifyer, expensive central air, complete

scrub down of the basement, excavating around the house and keep the

gutters well cleaned. All to cut back on the mold. However my lawn is

moss, the trees contain moss and not enough sun hits the property to dry

it up. I do find my sunny walk/runs help acclimate me.However I dread

the rain and summers.

Bernadette

kdrbrill wrote:

>Hi ,

>

>Just wondering if you've ever tried a round of antifungal meds or

>supps? There's a Dr. Cranton who believes most CFS is fungal

>(mold) related, and supposedly has found the only way to treat it

>successfully is with triple antifungal therapy for several months

>or longer...

>

>d.

>

>

>

>

>>Hi Blake.

>> " Multifactorial " is almost as confusing as " stress " since some

>>people construe it to mean " anything and everything that

>>

>>

>contributes

>

>

>>to an illness " .

>>By that model, " AIDS " is clearly multifactorial and yet none of

>>these multifactorial contributors can cause AIDS.

>>Before HIV was discoverd, Multifactorialism prevailed

>>and " stretchologizers " did their best to cook up a syndrome

>>

>>

> " stew "

>

>

>>in which a combination of ingredients, with a dash of perverted

>>lifestyle and deviant behaviors thrown in could result in a

>>devastating new illness.

>> Like psychologizing, the multifactorial model has failed so

>>

>>

>many

>

>

>>times that unless there is a clear reason for using it, I believe

>>that people need to concentrate on determining " what

>>

>>

>changed " rather

>

>

>>than focusing on all the known factors that DIDN'T.

>> I DO believe that CFS consists of multiple factors, even that

>>

>>

>the

>

>

>>Incline Village subset is an end result of a specific pathway

>>

>>

>that

>

>

>>branched OUT from a common denominator.

>> I believe that this common denominator will be found in the

>>genetic " flipping of the switch " initiated by specific toxins -

>>instead of the model proposed by " toxic overload " .

>> -

>>

>>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with each

other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any treatment

discussed here, please consult your doctor.

>

[Guest guest]

Borrelia and Candida both existed prior to this epidemic.

It seems unlikely that these pre-existing factors could have left

the illness unrecognized, unknown and totally disbelieved if they

resulted in this type of illness before.

It still appears that something must have changed as Dazsak

demonstrated with the enironmental meddling that resulted in the

outbreak of Nipah virus.

Nipah didn't change - the environment did.

So the question is: If Lyme in combination with other infections

can consistently result in CFS, then why did it fail to do so in

people who were identified with Lyme prior to the current situation.

As in the JRA identified by Polly Murray which got the whole Lyme

awareness going - it was an emerging epidemic, but it wasn't CFS.

I don't have any reason to believe that CFS is not the result of the

interplay of multiple factors, but it CERTAINLY NOT the consistent

and predictable result of all the various formerly benign infections

that are being implicated. If these factors didn't consistently

result in illness before, it is unlikely that they are doing it now

unless something changed.

" White Line disease " in horses has been driving veterinarians nuts.

It is an infection on the periphery of immune response in above the

hoof. Therapy with EITHER antibiotics or antifungals fails when

applied singly as the alternate infection just gets worse.

I remember that the few doctors who were getting significant results

in CFS patients at the Sydney conference were using Ampho-B plus

aggressive antibiotic therapy.

It seemed to me that this suggests there might be a similarity.

-

[Guest guest]

Good point - both Candida and Borrelia existed before. So to follow

this logic further, if those seem to be key elements now and treating

them both aggressively really helps PWC, then what has changed? Well,

here are two possibilities - ordinary strain mutation because of

inadequate treatments, and weaponization. Certainly it is possible that

the Candida and Borrelia now producing CFIDS (if that is true) would be

different strains from those that existed before. Maybe far more

virulent. And BOTH bugs are in bio-war arsenals, they both appear on

lists of weaponized bugs. So we know that enhanced strains exist. The

question is whether this is what we now are dealing with. OR, maybe the

bugs just adapted on their own, this is also certainly possible given

the level at which antibiotics are taken today.

Or perhaps some other mediator is now be in the mix, perhaps a virus

that takes-down part of the immune system that ordinarily controls these

types of bugs.

But there is no question that unchecked, these two infections can infect

every organ system, and produce a neurotoxin and mycotoxin load that

could be producing many or most symptoms we see as CFIDS.

Add to that the probability of parasitic infection when there is this

much immune load.

What type of mold treatment helped you? Could it have been working

against a fungal overgrowth?

--Kurt

Re: : Mold, fungal treatments?

Borrelia and Candida both existed prior to this epidemic.

It seems unlikely that these pre-existing factors could have left

the illness unrecognized, unknown and totally disbelieved if they

resulted in this type of illness before.

It still appears that something must have changed as Dazsak

demonstrated with the enironmental meddling that resulted in the

outbreak of Nipah virus.

Nipah didn't change - the environment did.

So the question is: If Lyme in combination with other infections

can consistently result in CFS, then why did it fail to do so in

people who were identified with Lyme prior to the current situation.

As in the JRA identified by Polly Murray which got the whole Lyme

awareness going - it was an emerging epidemic, but it wasn't CFS.

I don't have any reason to believe that CFS is not the result of the

interplay of multiple factors, but it CERTAINLY NOT the consistent

and predictable result of all the various formerly benign infections

that are being implicated. If these factors didn't consistently

result in illness before, it is unlikely that they are doing it now

unless something changed.

" White Line disease " in horses has been driving veterinarians nuts.

It is an infection on the periphery of immune response in above the

hoof. Therapy with EITHER antibiotics or antifungals fails when

applied singly as the alternate infection just gets worse.

I remember that the few doctors who were getting significant results

in CFS patients at the Sydney conference were using Ampho-B plus

aggressive antibiotic therapy.

It seemed to me that this suggests there might be a similarity.

-

This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with

each other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any

treatment discussed here, please consult your doctor.

_____

[Guest guest]

<kurt@i...> wrote:

> Good point - both Candida and Borrelia existed before. then what

has changed? Well, here are two possibilities - ordinary strain

mutation because of inadequate treatments, and weaponization.<

Definitely. But if strains had been weoponized, those particular

strains would swiftly emerge as the dominent pathogens (unless ALL

the emerging infections had been imbued with new pathogenesis)

What we are seeing is the vast emergence of a HUGE number of

formerly benign infections and apparent pathogenesis of ridiculous

levels of stress which have no historical capacity to cause the

level of suffering which they now create.

While treating these identified infections may be appropriate, they

should not be implicated as primary to development of the illness

since that guarantees a stop to any further investigation.

We are literally in the position of going to doctors with an

inability to stand up and are being told " Well then sit down. You

can pay on your way out the door " .

I don't need any doctor to tell me to reduce stress or how to pace

myself or how to " eat better " . I want answers as to why normal life

has become abnormally difficult.

If doctors are consistently unable to provide those answers to

people whose inability to tolerate normal life was acquired

simultaneously or in groups, these doctors need to be made aware

that they are observing a phenomenon that is beyond their capacity

and should pass on this information to suitable agencies.

So far, they are dealing with obvious abnormalities by denying

their existence or relevance and stretching pathogenesis of

many " stresses and stressors " out of proportion.

Patients must withdraw their support from phsyicians lame excuses

not to take action on this emerging epidemic.

-

[Guest guest]

<irrfamily@b...> wrote:

> Could you define " triple antifungal therapy " for mold. Or refer to

a web

> site please.

Dr. Elmer Cranton describes it on his webpage. Note that he

says it is not a cure-all, doesn't work for everyone, because as

states below, there are so many other factors that may be

involved. Treating systemic fungal infections can result in some

improvements, and sometimes in significant improvements...

The website:

http://drcranton.com/CFIDS.htm

I would really like to be on top of the mold season. I have

> invested in a Santa Fe dehunmidifyer, expensive central air,

complete

> scrub down of the basement, excavating around the house and

keep the

> gutters well cleaned. All to cut back on the mold. However my

lawn is

> moss, the trees contain moss and not enough sun hits the

property to dry

> it up. I do find my sunny walk/runs help acclimate me.However

I dread

> the rain and summers.

>

> Bernadette

>

>

> >

> >

> >>in which a combination of ingredients, with a dash of

perverted

> >>lifestyle and deviant behaviors thrown in could result in a

> >>devastating new illness.

> >> Like psychologizing, the multifactorial model has failed so

> >>

> >>

> >many

> >

> >

> >>times that unless there is a clear reason for using it, I

believe

> >>that people need to concentrate on determining " what

> >>

> >>

> >changed " rather

> >

> >

> >>than focusing on all the known factors that DIDN'T.

> >> I DO believe that CFS consists of multiple factors, even that

> >>

> >>

> >the

> >

> >

> >>Incline Village subset is an end result of a specific pathway

> >>

> >>

> >that

> >

> >

> >>branched OUT from a common denominator.

> >> I believe that this common denominator will be found in the

> >>genetic " flipping of the switch " initiated by specific toxins -

> >>instead of the model proposed by " toxic overload " .

> >> -

> >>

> >>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >This list is intended for patients to share personal

experiences with each other, not to give medical advice. If you

are interested in any treatment discussed here, please consult

your doctor.

> >

[Guest guest]

> While treating these identified infections may be appropriate,

they

> should not be implicated as primary to development of the

illness

> since that guarantees a stop to any further investigation.

I agree , although in some cases, an untreated systemic

fungal infection could be one of the main factors. Especially

since most mainstream MD's refuse to even recognize the

existence of systemic fungemia.

>

What has changed in the last 50-60-70 years? The

chemicalization (if there is such a word) of our environment,

inside and outside, and the frankenfood most of us eat.

Sure, almost everyone eats frankenfood every day, and doesn't

get sick (and stay sick), so I have a guess it might have more to

do with chemicals in our environment (which of course do get

into our food chain, and into us directly).

Although I hate to be conspiratorial, it could very well be the

possible " weaponization " you mentioned -- the germ warfare that

you know our government would never admit to showing a link.

Perhaps that's why funding for this " syndrome " is so lacking.

When did this germ warfare start? There have been outbreaks

before Incline Village -- were they smaller ones? Are these

germs spreading because there is a contagious aspect to the

illness? We certainly travel alot more than we were able to 50

years ago...

so many questions...

d.

[Guest guest]

The borrelia was bioweaponized as well as other tickborne bugs. Ages

ago antibiotics were not as widely used and not in as strong doses

(not necessary). Bugs evolved resistance, higher doses were used,

they were used indiscriminately and people developed fungal

infections that had not been seen before such use. Meanwhile, global

warming, increasing deer population, moving into wooded areas bla bla

bla, means that borrelia and other pathogens spread. You can make

sense of all this that way I think.

>

> Borrelia and Candida both existed prior to this epidemic.

> It seems unlikely that these pre-existing factors could have left

> the illness unrecognized, unknown and totally disbelieved if they

> resulted in this type of illness before.

> It still appears that something must have changed as Dazsak

> demonstrated with the enironmental meddling that resulted in the

> outbreak of Nipah virus.

> Nipah didn't change - the environment did.

>

> So the question is: If Lyme in combination with other infections

> can consistently result in CFS, then why did it fail to do so in

> people who were identified with Lyme prior to the current situation.

> As in the JRA identified by Polly Murray which got the whole Lyme

> awareness going - it was an emerging epidemic, but it wasn't CFS.

>

> I don't have any reason to believe that CFS is not the result of

the

> interplay of multiple factors, but it CERTAINLY NOT the consistent

> and predictable result of all the various formerly benign

infections

> that are being implicated. If these factors didn't consistently

> result in illness before, it is unlikely that they are doing it now

> unless something changed.

>

> " White Line disease " in horses has been driving veterinarians nuts.

> It is an infection on the periphery of immune response in above the

> hoof. Therapy with EITHER antibiotics or antifungals fails when

> applied singly as the alternate infection just gets worse.

> I remember that the few doctors who were getting significant

results

> in CFS patients at the Sydney conference were using Ampho-B plus

> aggressive antibiotic therapy.

> It seemed to me that this suggests there might be a similarity.

> -

[Guest guest]

>

> Definitely. But if strains had been weoponized, those particular

> strains would swiftly emerge as the dominent pathogens (unless ALL

> the emerging infections had been imbued with new pathogenesis)

Why? Weaponized doesn't mean better able to survive against other

borrelia, it means more virulent in the human host. IE you don't see

weaponized anthrax as the dominant pathogen, naturally occuring is

still frequent in parts of Texas etc.

[Guest guest]

<jenbooks13@h...> wrote:

> Why? Weaponized doesn't mean better able to survive against other

> borrelia, it means more virulent in the human host. IE you don't see

> weaponized anthrax as the dominant pathogen, naturally occuring is

> still frequent in parts of Texas etc.

If a weaponized pathogen were responsible for this illness, wouldn't

you expect to find a particular infection swiftly attain pre-eminence?

Seems like people are having problems with a huge variety of

spirochetes with only Borrelia taking the lead.

I thought that the anthrax that is being identified was natural and

non weaponized.

The weoponized anthrax is wildly apparent as demonstrated in the

accidental release in the Soviet Union where stray spores killed at a

range of a hundred miles.

-

[Guest guest]

> If a weaponized pathogen were responsible for this illness, wouldn't

> you expect to find a particular infection swiftly attain pre-

eminence?

I'm not sure you understand this infection . It is multiple

weaponized bugs, babesia bartonella and borrelia were all weaponized

imo, all intracellular bugs that could use the tick as a vector adn

adapt to a human host, and thus the infections have a wide variety of

symptoms. It's not obvious but rather, crippling in a variety of ways

depending on genetics, # of infections, strains etc. A weaponized

pathogen may test positive because of certain antigens on its surface,

just like the nonweaponized. However it will be weaponized to be more

resistant to treatment, more virulent, more easily disemminated into

the nervous system and have niches that are not obvious (babesia is

bone marrow). Thus you DO have terrible infections that though the CDC

may cover up, and the government, and doctors may be naive, the press

and grassroots write about them every day. Get onto Robynn's Lyme List

where she emails every article about lyme out...and you can see that

over time the suffering of those who dare to know and demand to know

is winning out.

[Guest guest]

" jill1313 " wrote:

> I'm not sure you understand this infection . It is multiple

> weaponized bugs, babesia bartonella and borrelia were all

weaponized imo, all intracellular bugs that could use the tick as a

vector adn adapt to a human host, and thus the infections have a wide

variety of symptoms. It's not obvious but rather, crippling in a

variety of ways depending on genetics, # of infections, strains etc. <

It looks like you have been trying to reconcile the " weoponized "

sceneario with the facts too. And the only way this model works is if

ALL these bugs were weaponized and even then, is complicated by the

genetic/individual/environmental response which leaves large variables

in the ability of these infections to create the eugenic effect

proposed by this " weaponized to weed out " hypothesis.

And of course, there is that one little problem that anything

intentionally designed to have this degree of pathogenesis means total

destruction of the earth as we know it.

Which would mean either an accidental release of some agent that has

the capacity to introduce such pathogenesis to other Lyme species or

that all these disparate species got out of the lab around the same

time.

If they all got out simultaneously, that would mean someone messed up

really badly or that it was wilfully self destructive.

The other alternative is that something has semi-universally decreased

immune function and allowed all these formerly less destructive

infections to have " appaarent " increased pathogenesis and that we just

haven't found it yet because we aren't looking.

-