Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

MS - important spirochetal finding - and tying up loose ends

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

I posted before mainly about Steiners 1930s-50s findings of

spirochetes and possible spirochetal pleoforms in MS. I was concerned

with possible non-specificities of the silver stain he used. Then I

read a work claiming to have found similar forms in a number of other

diseases (but not in health) using Steiners own process. I havent

attempted to locate a response in Steiner extensive corpus (much ofit

in German). For now I dont want to deal with this silver stuff anymore.

I was very surprised to learn today that none other than the Brorsons

published on a spirochetal MS finding in 2001. They blindly examined

CSF of 9 patients and 5 controls before and after culture, and found

L-forms in in 9/9 and 0/5! They didnt quantifty. The ovoid L-forms

depicted have dimensions like 3 um to 10 um. They stained heavily on

IEM with nonspecific polyclonal antibody raised against Bb. I dont see

that the world has much noticed this amazing work and I'm having a

little bitterness trip on that. I understand Gay may also have

observed something in recent years but I havent been able to get that

paper.

The Prineas and Barnett 2004 finding is landmark, tho I found it odd

that they glossed over the fact that some developing MS lesions they

examined werent like the others, which they pretty much present as a

new stereotype of the development of lesions. What they found was

universal oligodendrocyte apoptosis thruout the multi-milimeter

lesions, occuring rapidly. I have no ideas for explaining this in

terms of any spirochetal-infectious process, but I know nothing about

the brain.

Finally, something I dont want to get into right now but which is very

important, are these finding suggesting autoimmune processes may be

key in the pathology:

14688203 (cited by Wheldons paper), which demonstrated IgG toxicity in

vitro, but doesnt seem to address whether the IgG concentration used

was phsysiological(!) and

10683515 which I just saw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...