CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Medical topics with questions, information and discussion related to Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases.
Post Reply
OneGuest
Posts: 300
Joined: Wed 21 Nov 2007 4:08

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by OneGuest » Sun 3 Aug 2008 21:46

Good questions, LE.

The stain though might be proprietary. There also may be
other stains that are used. I dont know about those things!

And the PCR testing to be done by them when they get their machine, will be
a huge help. That's why, to me, it would seem rash to condemn, and also rash to get on the
bandwagon of treating as if it truly were myco or bart.

Now, if you had bart symptoms....or other evidence, then that would point to bart tx.
There also are drug combos that will do both, so it would be possible for an MD to just
do that..i.e. treat a probable bart with combo that also treats myco. Then when the info from
pcr comes out, adjustments or re-treatments could be done.

The same could apply to a known myco dx. through other sources, with no bart positive test.
Just do a combo.

Attachment to the outside of the cells is part of their cycle.

I am doing some searches, now. I know I have read it somewhere.

OneGuest

OneGuest
Posts: 300
Joined: Wed 21 Nov 2007 4:08

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by OneGuest » Sun 3 Aug 2008 22:38

Attachment to RBC's by bartonella: (actually it is both intra and extra cellular, depending
on how it feels that day! Or what kind of mischief it is up to.

lyme md says:
The other type of Bartonella is a small gram negative bacteria which is transmitted by ticks and other bitinginsects. It may live inside red blood cells but does not attach itself to the outside of red blood cells. It is not visible by any well established microscopic test.
============================================

Bartonella bacilliformis
first paragraph of this pdf states they attach to outer surface of rbc
second page: showing smear
http://www.bloodjournal.org/cgi/reprint/33/5/708.pdf

============================================

B. bacilliformis (South America) have flagella. Another variety has cilia for attaching to rbc.
The flagella is used to adhere to cell wall and is involved in process of
ensuing invasion into cell!

http://jmm.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/full/51/11/915
=============================================

MICROBIOLOGY:
Bartonella species are gram-negative, aerobic, motile bacilli (rods).

B. bacilliformis is motile by a unipolar flagellum and B. henselae has a jerky motility without flagella. The bacteria are difficult to culture from tissues, are fastidious, but are
somewhat easier to culture from blood.

Because Bartonella are erythrocyte-associated (internal or on their surfaces) blood culture systems that lyse erythrocytes facilitate and enhance isolation of the bacteria from blood.
=============================================

Somebody mentioned that they had another agency look at their Fry smear , and
stated that if they had that much bacteriemia floating in their blood, they would
be dead.

I ran across this quote from Dr. Schaller:

http://www.publichealthalert.org/Articl ... nored.html
Bartonella is a massive immune suppressing bacteria. It can float attached to Red Blood Cells in vast numbers and not even cause a cold or fever.

Just imagine, bacteria are floating in your blood and you might not have any fever at all! If you had Staph or Strep in your blood at these levels you would likely be dead in 48 hours unless you were pumped full of antibiotics in an ICU.

So how is it this huge elephant floats in vast numbers and causes no severe fever and no disastrous signs of deadly sepsis—infected blood throughout the body with massive inflammation.

It is because it has ways of shutting down the immune system. It violates many rules of bacteria behavior and this is one reason it has been so seriously missed until recent years.

OneGuest
Posts: 300
Joined: Wed 21 Nov 2007 4:08

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by OneGuest » Sun 3 Aug 2008 22:50

lyme md says bartonella cant be seen with microscope.

Evidence that it can be seen with microscope:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl= ... l%26sa%3DN

I am going to guess he means to say the myco and bart cannot be differentiated with a
microscope.

They can be seen, though.

OneGuest

kelmo
Posts: 592
Joined: Sun 28 Oct 2007 21:31
Location: Valley of the Sun

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by kelmo » Mon 4 Aug 2008 0:20

Wright-Leishman stain,
I can only tell you over the past 2 1/2 years that he has told me he uses a silver stain. Whether it's what you have called it, I don't know. I try to grasp as much information as I can when we talk, but I have cognitive issues with information intake, myself, so I sift what applies to my daughter as priority.

Before these photos went public, he used to show me different photos all the time. My daughter was one of the first patients to receive a copy of her own blood smear.

I'm going to print off this thread and take it to him when we see him this week. I'll let him answer the questions himself.

Kelmo

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by rlstanley » Mon 4 Aug 2008 3:40

Looking at my questions though:

Are people who pay for these labs considered research subjects?

Are people being treated based on this lab's results?

Have these Fry lab tests been validated by any other labs?

Are there published results in a credible journal concerning the techniques and results coming from this lab?

Why is this lab considered so good?


I haven't seen any answers to these questions except it seems people ARE being treated based on results from this lab...correct me if I am wrong.

That quote from Schaller doesn't lend anything in the area of authority or credibility. Or data.

Really, what is SO GREAT about this lab? Objective evidence please.

Rita

kelmo
Posts: 592
Joined: Sun 28 Oct 2007 21:31
Location: Valley of the Sun

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by kelmo » Mon 4 Aug 2008 6:24

Yes, got the questions.

Will you be satisfied with the answers?


Edited to add:

Research? My daughter signed a waver to be used as a reseach subject when she started as a patient. We did not get paid for this, nor did we get free treatment. I paid out of pocket for over a year until our insurance was accepted by the doc. However, the lab facility is still out of pocket expense for me.

Treated based on lab results: Yes. My daughter is being treated based on the smear, the Fry lab serum results, and the Lab Corp results. Others in our local support group are being treated based on the smear. It was eye opening to several who had their blood work done by IGENEX. They are making progress in their treatment, and are glad they had the test done. You can go to the Yahoo Group site for Arizona Lyme and see what they have to say.

I can't remember your other questions. I'm not sure what else to tell you. I haven't answered the questions before because I felt I needed research to back it up. However, after reading the questions you posed, it still comes up a subject analysis.

So, with any answer I give you, you will come up with your own conclusions anyway. You don't have to give Fry Lab any credibility, it won't sway those who have had their blood test done and are using as a basis for treatment.

For me, just seeing the blood smear backed up band 41 on my Western Blot answered some questions as to my declining health.

For my daughter, seeing the babesia on the blood took her treatment in another direction that helped relieve her of many symptoms.

On Lymenet, I've been following Siebertneurolyme (Bea) and her husband for a couple of years. After the Fry blood smear, it changed his treatment, and he has made incredible strides in his health.

Subjective...but, that's all I have to offer.

But, isn't that how most of us saught treatment? Some had negative WB results, but symptoms out the wazoo. This has been a clinical diagnosis for a majority of patients.

Someday, the research he has been pursuing will be published. But, I can tell you, it will never be on the scale of a certain doctor who puts out a new book every six months.

You are always welcome to call the doc, himself. www.airparkmed.com

hiker53
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri 28 Mar 2008 22:14

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by hiker53 » Mon 4 Aug 2008 19:15

Fry Labs is CLIA certified (which the CDC did not know).

I did not know the results would be used for research purposes. On the form I filled out from www.frylabs.com to send in my blood it says nothing about research. Howver, when the test results came back it said "this stain is not FDA approved and is for research use only." I sort of resent this as I paid money to get tested and feel they need my permission to use my blood research, although I do not mind if it will lead to some answers.

I did the blood smear and one stain used was giasma. (at least that is what the order form says).

Dr. Fry on his radio program with Sue Vogan did give some possible treatment combos. When I spoke with him in person he said I would have to talk to my LLMD about treatment. However, my LLMD is clueless about Fry Labs and what the results of this test mean.

So, I have chosen to wait on treatment hoping they find out what the organism is. Since I don't handle antibiotics well, I don't want to do a whole bunch that do not work trying to find the right combination.

Some people feel that what Dr. Fry has found is the "bartonella like organisms" that Dr. Burrascano talks about.

I have always felt I had another co-infection besides lyme and ehrlichiosis, but my tests always came up negative at Igenex. When I ran the antibody test at Fry it came up with a low IgG titer for Bart 1:64 but no IgM for bart and nothing for babesia. To make sure, I then had the blood smear run, knowing they could see babesia for sure. None was found and I was surprised to get a results that said "sugggestive of hemobartonella or mycoplasma."

www.frylabs.com has pictures of what they are seeing on the blood smears. #2 is what was found on my slide.

Hiker53

cave76
Posts: 3182
Joined: Sun 12 Aug 2007 2:27

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by cave76 » Mon 4 Aug 2008 19:23

I'm not Fry literate OR on any 'side' by any means -----but
Howver, when the test results came back it said "this stain is not FDA approved and is for research use only."
Isn't that written on some of IGeneX's reports? Seems to me I seen them there (or somewhere else).

kelmo
Posts: 592
Joined: Sun 28 Oct 2007 21:31
Location: Valley of the Sun

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by kelmo » Mon 4 Aug 2008 19:24

I did not know the results would be used for research purposes.
I don't know what happens when the blood is mailed to the lab. I can only speak about what we deal with as patients.

It used to be mandatory that the blood draw be made through your LLMD so that your LLMD was part of the results and treatment. So, anyone can now send in a blood sample independent of your doctor?

My daughter signed a specific waiver to use her treatment and labwork for research purposes.

By the way, other labs use your blood for reseach and control. I remember when I got Parvovirus back in the mid-90's they requested another pint from me for their control batch. For that, they paid me. It was hard to get, though. Parvovirus attacks the bone marrow and stops blood production. So, I was very anemic. They just took the plasma.

Again...no one needs to use Fry lab! This is a choice made, and it is up to you if you send it in. Has anyone sued IGENEX for false negatives? Don't we expect that a certain percentage will be false negatives?

itsy
Posts: 786
Joined: Mon 29 Oct 2007 21:03

Re: CDC and Fry Lab blood smear--weird info!

Post by itsy » Mon 4 Aug 2008 19:35

Oh, I even had that disclaimer on a lab of mine that was a regular lab. I had some kind of esophilic catatonic protein or other such name like that which had the same disclaimer.

There was another test too...maybe my CD57 that said something like that, maybe not the same words but similar.

I believe years ago a disclaimer came with my saliva adrenal test, too. Great Smokies, I think??

Come on kids, now you are REACHING to look for something weird. This is a COMMON disclaimer in these situations.

Let's not forget to keep perspective. If you chose to have the CD57 done, you'd get the same message because nothing has been proven...however, some swear by it!!

Such is a lot of things in lymeland. And probably other areas of study. Lets stick to the facts. If you are having a test at an independant lab (not a hospital. not quest. not labcorp) you are going to get messages like this. So, moving right along....

Post Reply