Re: More from Dr. Schardt/nystatin

[Guest guest]

It doesn't make sense to me that Nystatin (oral) could have any sort

of SYSTEMIC antibiotic effect when hardly any of it goes beyond the

gut.

> > Penny you write

> > " Tony's been saying forever that antifungals (like Nystatin)

will

> > actually kill the bacteria as well. He's been ridiculed

endlessly

> > for it, and here's this doctor doing the same basic thing.

> >

> > Not the same basic thing , many antibiotics both fungal &

> bacterial are

> > duel to some extent .....Nysatin is a completely different class

> of drug

> > working against fungi in a completely different way to

Fluconazole

> &

[Guest guest]

exactly!

> > > Penny you write

> > > " Tony's been saying forever that antifungals (like Nystatin)

> will

> > > actually kill the bacteria as well. He's been ridiculed

> endlessly

> > > for it, and here's this doctor doing the same basic thing.

> > >

> > > Not the same basic thing , many antibiotics both fungal &

> > bacterial are

> > > duel to some extent .....Nysatin is a completely different

class

> > of drug

> > > working against fungi in a completely different way to

> Fluconazole

> > &

[Guest guest]

Well, if a lot of your bacteria is residing in your gut, or somehow

being recycled in the gut (i.e. nasal drainage), it could have a major

impact.

penny

> It doesn't make sense to me that Nystatin (oral) could have any sort

> of SYSTEMIC antibiotic effect when hardly any of it goes beyond the

> gut.

[Guest guest]

Perhaps, but that didn't seem to be the original point... but hey,

whatever works...

> > It doesn't make sense to me that Nystatin (oral) could have any

sort

> > of SYSTEMIC antibiotic effect when hardly any of it goes beyond

the

> > gut.

[Guest guest]

To me it's very much the point. There's no proof that our illness or

our symptoms are due to spirochetes or to cell wall deficient

organisms ONLY. There are all kinds of organisms that cause all

kinds of illness symptoms, and it would be a shame to overlook an

overgrowth of any of them. For example, if reducing a yeast

overgrowth strengthens someone's body and their immune system, while

reducing symtpoms, that's great. We don't ignore treating the yeast,

just because we're dx'd with BB.

Our guts play a big role in our health, and reducing a bad bacterial

load through the gut could be significant to our health. My tests

have always shown little evidence of beneficial gut flora, while I

have plenty of evidence that I've got a lot of bad gut flora. It has

overpowered the good stuff. If Nystatin somehow has the ability to

kill not only yeast, but bad bacteria in the gut as well, and helps

to restore a healthier balance, that's a good thing. And pretty safe.

penny

> > > It doesn't make sense to me that Nystatin (oral) could have

any

> sort

> > > of SYSTEMIC antibiotic effect when hardly any of it goes

beyond

> the

> > > gut.

[Guest guest]

Actually Penny, I couldn't agree with you less. First, in the

original post, someone spoke of Nystatin in a way that was systemic

and how it might be antibacterial. Nystatin stays in the gut. Now

you hypothesize that it might be bacteria in the gut and that

nystatin will work for that. Great, whatever. But I'm not going to

apply my comment to a moving target -- it was meant in regard to the

systemic implications not this new hypothesis you suggest now.

Sure, gut health is important. Rather than guessing what evil might

lurk there, get it tested. Great Smokey Mountain Lab (or whatever

the exact name is) does a dandy job - parasites, bacteria, yeast,

you name it. In fact, I recently had it done. No parasites or

yeast, but a bacterial infection. Happily, it is sensitive to mino,

so I will be starting that today for both the gut & the Bb. Worried

about yeast and bacteria as you suggest? Collect data.

As for your multi-bacterial hypothesis, it feels as if you are

hearding together a group of zebras when horses will generate

sufficient manure on their own. I was fine. I got an EM, I've had

a bajillion positive Bb tests on blood and CSF alike. I get better

when I take antibiotics. I recently tested positive for babesios

(never before tested). I suspect I'll feel better when I get

treated for that too. Literature says that 30% or so of ticks in NJ

harbor both Bb and babesia, so this makes sense. I don't need to

hypothesize alternative bugs or diminish the role of Bb for some

reason to account for my health or symptoms. I also don't see how

that better accounts for the data in the literature.

I think one aspect of your multi-bacterial argument that I take

great umbrage with is that you suggest a REDUCED role of Bb. WHY?

I just haven't seen the anecdotal and certainly not evidentiary-

based support for this hypothesis. It's strikes me as Freud-like in

which the hypothesis constantly morphs to evade supporting data...

> > > > It doesn't make sense to me that Nystatin (oral) could have

> any

> > sort

> > > > of SYSTEMIC antibiotic effect when hardly any of it goes

> beyond

> > the

> > > > gut.

[Guest guest]

HI Durameter,

" duramater27 " wrote:

> Actually Penny, I couldn't agree with you less.

Yeah, well I'm used to that. I've been to quite a few doctors. :-)

I don't recall a post mentioning the systemic benefits of Nystatin,

or I didn't interpret it that way. If I recall, someone made the

assumption about systemic benefits being claimed, but the assertion

was never made.

And perhaps you weren't aware, being kind of new, that this is not

an exclusively lyme board. It's an " infection " board. At least that

was my intention when I created it. And that's why I called it

Infection & Inflammation.

I've ALWAYS, for years, been concerned that people might get too

fixated on one organism while letting others get by them. I was just

happy though, that people at least started accepting the premise

that infection might be the cause of these chronic illnesses, and

that people were recognizing the similarities between other chronic

illnesses, like CFS, FMS RA, lyme disease, etc. and how they all

respond to abx treatment.

I've always been open to the lyme theories even though I haven't

tested positive for it myself. I found a lot more helpful info on

the lyme boards than I did on the CFS boards, since no one believed

until recently that CFS could possibly be caused by bacteria. I even

suspect that I may have BB. I KNOW for sure, from lab testing, that

I've got several toxic staphs and pseudomonas and a few other nasty

organisms in places where they're not supposed to be and that my

health responds positively when I treat them with ABX. AT first I

was dx'd dx'd with CFS, FMS, (and numerous other ailments) and then

I was dx'd with chronic osteomyeltis (bone infection). I know

definitively that I've got staph aureus in the bone (number one

cause of osteomyelitis), which is very bad. I've got it in my

sinuses as well. Along with pseudomonas. I may have BB in the bone

too, but if I can't kill the abx resistant staph, knowing I have BB

isn't going to help me all that much. Especially if I can't be 100%

confident in the BB test results, but CAN be 100% confident in the

staph test results.

Most people don't test for these other organisms, even though

they're much easier to test for (if you can convince a doc or a lab

to test for them). Unfortunately, most labs throw a lot of stuff out

as " normal flora " despite their abx resistance and their toxicity,

and the scientific literature which supports that these organisms

cause chronic illness. Since doctors today know so very little about

bacteria, we have to advocate for ourselves to get these tests done.

But since everyone's so blinded by the " lyme light " most people

aren't even interested in looking at the research, let alone get

tested, for the other, more common, infectious bugs, or in looking

at how they're negatively affecting our health. I was ecstatic when

Dr. Shoemaker came out saying that if you don't treat the staph (or

the mold) first, you're not going to get the lyme.

I just keep bringing it up as a reminder, the sole voice in the

wilderness, because nobody else does. I was talking infection on the

CFS/FMS boards years ago and getting criticized heavily for it

(while Tony was being banned). Now it's an accepted theory, but it's

all about lyme now. One dogma gets traded for another. The narrow

focus and lack of open mindedness to new theories is why I went

pretty quiet for a long time, and spent more time on boards where

people are dx'd and treated for actual, medically recognized

infections, like osteomyelitis. That was until the whole A-CID thing

came to light, and I was compelled to become actively involved again

by setting up a group to explore the issue.

If you go to other forums which deal with other dx's caused by

different kinds of known chronic infections, and recognize the

similarities in the symptoms of our illnesses, you start realizing

that Lyme may not be the only nasty bug in the world. I think

ignoring the other infectious possibilities is hurting our chances

for recovery, but that's just my opinion.

I just want people to try to be at least a little open minded to the

possibilities.

Also, I HAVE had many SMOKY MOUNTAIN tests done, I'm not sure why

you'd assume I haven't?

penny