Archive for the ‘research’ Category

Patient With Facial Palsy From Lyme Disease Fails Treatment

https://danielcameronmd.com/patient-facial-palsy-from-lyme-disease-fails-treatment/

PATIENT WITH FACIAL PALSY FROM LYME DISEASE FAILS TREATMENT

facial palsy from lyme disease in elderly man

Facial palsy, sometimes referred to as Bell’s palsy, is considered an early sign of Lyme disease. When the infection is diagnosed in the early stage it is typically easier to treat. However, this case report features an elderly patient with facial palsy from Lyme disease who remained ill following treatment.

By 

In this case report, Hareem and colleagues describe a 71-year-old man with facial palsy from Lyme disease who failed treatment. The authors offer an inside look at what led up to the failed treatment.¹

Steroids associated with treatment failure?

The man was initially treated in August 2017 for an upper respiratory tract infection and prescribed the steroid dexamethasone. The previous year, he had a tick bite but no rash. One week later he was seen for a sore throat, right-sided ear pain, headache, dizziness, nausea, neck pain, and tinnitus. He had slight asymmetry of his smile.

Lyme disease Western blot test results were positive and the patient was prescribed doxycycline. However, several days later, the man returned with a complete facial palsy from Lyme disease. His condition had worsened.

“On his next visit, he complained of continuing right-sided headache and neck pain along with right-sided hearing loss, right-sided otalgia, dizziness, and nausea,” wrote the authors. His treatment was changed to cefuroxime.

Gait problems, hearing loss

Two weeks later his condition was even worse. “He continued to complain of gait instability and otalgia with hearing loss and neck pain,” wrote the authors. His treatment was changed to 30 days of doxycycline. He had an 80% hearing loss in the right ear and 25% in the left ear on audiology testing.

Authors’ conclusion

The man was diagnosed with “chronic Lyme disease from failed antibiotic therapy with simultaneous unilateral involvement of the seventh and eighth cranial nerves.”  He was prescribed an additional 4 weeks of doxycycline but remained ill. 

Wormer and colleagues previously discussed treatment failures in Lyme disease patients treated with steroids.2

Editor’s Note:  The 71-year-man never received a course of intravenous ceftriaxone. The authors did not discuss other diagnostic or treatment options.

Related Articles:

Steroids harmful to patients with Bell’s palsy caused by Lyme disease

Bell’s palsy can lead to non-flaccid facial palsy

Treatment varies for Bell’s palsy in children with Lyme disease

References:
  1. Hareem A, Dabiri I, Zaheer N, Burakgazi AZ. Medically Refractory Neuroborreliosis Case Presented with Coexistance Involvements of Cranial 7 and 8 Nerves. Neurol Int. Mar 18 2021;13(1):125-129. doi:10.3390/neurolint13010012
  2. Wormser GP, Brady KC, Cho MS, Scavarda CA, McKenna D. Efficacy of a 14-day course of amoxicillin for patients with erythema migrans. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. Jun 2019;94(2):192-194. doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2019.01.003

____________________

For more:

Category:

Lyme, research

What Does a Lyme Rash Look Like?

https://danielcameronmd.com/what-does-a-lyme-disease-rash-look-like/  Podcast Here

WHAT DOES A LYME DISEASE RASH LOOK LIKE?

what does a lyme disease rash look like

Welcome to another Inside Lyme Podcast. I am your host Dr. Daniel Cameron. In this episode, I will be discussing a question I’m asked frequently: What does a Lyme disease rash look like? As a new study has found, the erythma migrans rash can appear differently based on several factors.

By 

The study by Rebman and colleagues, entitled “The presenting characteristics of erythema migrans vary by age, sex, duration, and body location,” was published in Infection in March 2021.¹ It addressed a frequently asked question: What does a Lyme disease rash look like?

The erythema migrans (EM) rash (or Bull’s-eye rash), considered a definitive sign of Lyme disease, is often mistakenly thought to appear similar in all individuals – a circular red lesion which expands to at least 2 inches.

But as Rebman and colleagues report, a Lyme disease rash can look different based on several factors and does not always appear as the familiar Bull’s-eye rash. In fact, the authors suggest that relying solely on a Bull’s-eye appearance, when evaluating a rash for possible Lyme disease can lead to delays in diagnosis and treatment.

Diverse characteristics of Lyme disease rash

The authors examined 271 Lyme disease patients who had an erythema migrans rash to determine what does a Lyme disease rash look like? ¹

“We studied associations between these presenting characteristics [of EM rashes], as well as whether they were associated with age, sex, EM duration, body location, and initiation of antibiotics,” the authors write.

The patients were part of a longitudinal cohort study from 3 sites in Maryland and southeastern Pennsylvania. They were not enrolled if their rash was under 5 cm in diameter (2 inches) or their acute illness was longer than 3 months.

The study found that:

  • EM size increased over time with the EM duration peaking at 14 days.
  • Males had larger rashes than females (an average of 2.8 cm larger).
  • Males were more likely to have a blue/red rash. In fact, the odds of a red rash in males was 65% lower than in females.
  • Age was a significant predictor of central clearing. For every 10-year increase in age, the odds of central clearing decreased 25%. As age increased, there was a greater likelihood of a solid rash.
  • EM rashes were more likely to occur in harder to see body locations (i.e.,  behind the thigh and behind the knees). The authors assumed that ticks had an opportunity to attach longer in these areas before being discovered.
  • Nearly 1 in 3 patients had multiple rashes on examination.
  • Approximately 1 in 3 patients reported pain at the site of the rash.  
  • Just over 50% of the EM rashes were itchy.
  • Rash shapes were varied ─ 50.9% were round; 39.1% were oval. The remaining rashes were irregular.
  • Rash colors were varied ─ about 3 out of 4 were red. The remaining rashes were blue/red.
  • Rash patterns were varied ─  only 28% appeared as a Bull’s-eye rash (a ring within the rash). Central lightness (17.3%), central darkness (28.8%) and uniform rashes (25.8%) were also described.
  • Over 90% of the rashes were homogeneous. The remaining rashes were uneven.
  • Nearly 9% presented with vesicles. 

Concerns with limiting size of Lyme disease rash

The authors raised concerns with following a 5 cm (or less than 2 inches) cutoff for EM rashes in determining the presence of a Lyme disease infection.

“Applying a 5 cm size cutoff in research or surveillance settings may thus exclude a higher proportion of females with otherwise suggestive clinical histories and epidemiological risk,” the authors write.

They also raised concerns about recognizing an EM rash in darker skinned patients. “95.9% of our final sample self-identified as non-Hispanic white.”

The authors suggest that the variation in EM rash presentations in males vs. females and among various ages may be related to an immune response to the Borrelia infection.

Authors’ Conclusion

“Given that EM remains a clinical diagnosis, it is essential that both physicians and the general public are aware of its varied manifestations.”

Editor’s note

Unfortunately, fewer than half of Lyme disease patients present with an erythema migrans rash. This case series merely reflects the diversity of rashes in Lyme disease patients fortunate enough to present with a rash.

The following questions are addressed in this episode:

  • What is an erythema migrans rash?
  • How often do Lyme disease patients have an erythema migrans rash?
  • Can you culture Lyme disease from a rash?
  • How long do erythema migrans rashes last?
  • What other rashes resemble an erythema migrans rash?
  • What color rashes have you seen?
  • Where are rashes located?
  • What is the significance of multiple rashes on examination?
  • Have you seen itchy erythema migrans rashes?
  • Can you discuss diversity of erythema migrans rashes that were described?
  • Could a rash less than 2 inches in diameter be important?
  • What do we know about the appearance of rashes in people of color?
  • What is the importance of a smaller rash in women?
    Thanks for listening to another Inside Lyme Podcast. You can read more about these cases in my show notes and on my website @DanielCameronMD.com. As always, it is your likes, comments, reviews, and shares that help spread the word about Lyme disease. Until next time on Inside Lyme.

Please remember that the advice given is general and not intended as specific advice to any particular patient. If you require specific advice, then please seek that advice from an experienced professional.

Inside Lyme Podcast Series

This Inside Lyme case series will be discussed on my Facebook page and made available on podcast and YouTube.  As always, it is your likes, comments, and shares that help spread the word about this series and our work. If you can, please leave a review on iTunes or wherever else you get your podcasts.

References:
  1. Rebman AW, Yang T, Mihm EA, et al. The presenting characteristics of erythema migrans vary by age, sex, duration, and body location. Infection. Mar 7 2021; doi:10.1007/s15010-021-01590-0

___________________

For more:

To be clear, having the EM rash is diagnostic for Lyme. You are infected. On the other hand, NOT having the rash doesn’t mean you aren’t infected.

Also, EM rashes wax and wane despite treatment. Treating the EM rash is illogical because borrelia becomes systemic (all over the body) within hours. It means nothing if the EM rash disappears. This is why it’s critical to get to a Lyme literate doctor (LLMD) who is educated on such matters.

Category:

Lyme, research

4 Experts on COVID-19 Being Engineered

http://

July 4, 2021

At a hearing on the COVID-19 origins, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) criticized Dr. Anthony Fauci’s actions and statements at the beginning of the pandemic.

Previously, I posted Dr. Stephen Quay’s testimony here.

In the segment featured in this 12:00 minute video we learn:

  • It is very unlikely this “virus” was found in nature.
  • It was likely evolved in a lab.
  • The coronavirus bears a “signature” that’s never been seen in this virus class before and came “completely pre-adapted to humans,” according to Atossa Therapeutics CEO Dr Steven Quay.
  • Dr. Quay states, “gain of opportunity” is where millions of copies of this virus are in the lab where it can infect researchers. The Wuhan Lab has cameras set up to capture any accidents, yet the WHO appears not to have asked to see the security footage in October when there was a black-out, or in Sept. when the virus data base was suddenly pulled off-line.  Source  Wuhan lab researchers were in fact hospitalized with COVID in 2019.
  • If ‘authorities’ would have known the lab engineered issue early on, thousands of lives could have been saved.
  • The ‘virus’ was created to block the interferon response.  If you get a fever and get sick because of your interferon response, it will become more infectious and you will be asymptomatic.
  • According to an email sent by a scientist to Dr. Fauci on Jan. 31, 2020, it was known that,“some of the features look engineered.”  The researcher also stated, “We all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”  
  • Jim Gordon states Fauci manufactured an article to downplay this fact.
  • Fauci’s emails reveal he threatened Indian scientists who discovered COVID is engineered with AIDS like insertions.
  • Another expert corrects Gordon and states the U.S. was on notice as far back as Feb. 2017 when the French were kicked out of the Wuhan lab and told the world that, “this might be the beginning of a WMD program.”  He also states Fauci would have known about this as well.
  • It is clear from public statements that the Wuhan lab was working on “dual research” for the future of “hybrid warfare.”  This is called “dual research of concern” or DURC.  If the COVID “virus” got out of the lab it would be a weapons-like release.  The expert also states, “there shouldn’t be any surprise here.”  He also wonders why no one paid any attention to this.”  
  • Another expert states that the issues of lab creation through gene splicing and through ‘gain of function’ is “compelling and beyond reasonable doubt.”  And that the scientific evidence is very strong.
  • At 9:00 they discussed “export-controls” for biotechnology.  This also covers “information,” specifically regarding genetic information.  The Chinese are doing a lot of gene sequencing of Americans.
  • Often, when Americans get genetic testing done, it is sent to BGI (offices in Denmark & China) where they keep a copy.  This genetic information is critically important, powerful, and can be used to create weaponry that affects people with specific genes – an ethnic weapon if you will.
  • The expert also states the Chinese realize the power of this and he believes have a law protecting Chinese genetic information from ever leaving their country.
  • Most people are oblivious to this very real threat.  Genetic information should be protected as a vital national security secret.
Not mentioned in this video is the tax-payer dollar amount regarding ‘gain of function’ research.

Dr. Martin recently addressed the history of the development of the SARS bioweapon, which was originally funded for AIDS/HIV research in 1999, and he dropped this bombshell:

“Anthony Fauci has spent, listen to this number, 191 BILLION dollars, not 3.7 million, not 30 million, 191 BILLION dollars of audited funds for the bioweaponization of viruses against humanity.

And it is YOUR money that has been spent.”  Source

And lastly, it appears the COVID “vaccine” was invented before COVID.

For more:

Category:

Activism, research

Awaited Ivermectin Review is Out

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93485?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2021-07-

Awaited Ivermectin Review Is Out

— Findings are positive, but critics still want a randomized controlled trial

by Kristina Fiore, Director of Enterprise & Investigative Reporting, MedPage Today July 8, 2021

Boxes and blister pack of Ivermectin Tablets USP Boxes and blister pack of Ivermectin Tablets USP and a prescription bottle.a

Proponents of ivermectin for COVID-19 have long been talking about an expected review and meta-analysis led by Andrew Hill, PhD, of the University of Liverpool.

These results were finally published this week in Open Forum Infectious Diseases, and they’re positive — but they haven’t escaped criticism, and most researchers still want results from a randomized controlled trial.  (See link for article)

___________________

**Comment**

The following was found from the review:

  • There was a 56% reduction in mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.77, P=0.004), with 3% of patients on ivermectin dying compared with 9% of controls
  • A 70% improvement in survival (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.15-0.58, P=0.0004)
  • A reduction in time to recovery of 1.58 days compared with controls (95% CI -2.8 to -0.35, P=0.01) 
  • A shorter duration of hospitalization (-4.27 days, 95% CI -8.6 to -0.06, P=0.05).
But this still wasn’t good enough for critics.

And there’s been 32 randomized controlled trials done to date, but that still isn’t good enough for critics.

The key for this is found in the following quote:

“Of course, rolling out vaccination as quickly and widespread as possible would negate the need to use ivermectin as a treatment,” he added. “So big picture, vaccines are the better solution.”

This is completely backwards.

Rolling out effective treatments as quickly and widespread as possible negates the need for a vaccine!  But history is being rewritten to state natural immunity will only be achieved through vaccines – the magic bullet for mankind.

Despite what mainstream news and medical rag journals like Medscape state, current research shows:

isummarySource: Database of all ivermectin COVID-19 studies – www.c19ivermectin.com – (constantly updated)

For the backstory on how Remdesivir obtained EUA status despite lack of effectiveness, while Ivermectin languished on shelves see this article for the sordid history.

In what can only be described as “shennanigans,” researchers changed the primary outcome measures in the study for Remdesivir to make it appear more successful.  Go here for more info.

For more on Ivermectin:

“We now have four large randomized control trials totaling over 1,500 patients each trial showing that as a prophylaxis agent [against COVID-19] it is immensely effective,” Kory said. “You will not get sick. You will be protected from getting ill if you take it in early outpatient treatment.”

Please see FLCCC’s COVID-19 treatment protocols for every stage of illness: https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/  as well as the research on it:   https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/

Lastly, the following was written about the Medscape piece:

I have years of experience with Ivermectin in the Brazilian Amazon. The drug in general, has acceptable safety profile. Ivermectin has few established mechanisms of action; chief among them are its immunomodulatory and antiinflammatory properties. Recently, Australian scientists conducted an in vitro study of the MOA of Ivermectin with respect to SARS-CoV-2 replication. The Australian study showed it interferes with a specific protein product which is essential in the viral replication cycle. Considering the benefit of this drug outweighs the risk, Ivermectin is a reliable and practical solution in resource-limited countries where access to COVID-19 meds is scarce. It is commonly understood that in the western countries, the Big Pharma resists prescription of Ivermectin for COVID19 cases.  – Prof. Dr. Nassiri, July 9, 2021

BINGO!

Category:

research, Treatment, Viruses

Lyme & Sudden Hearing Loss

https://danielcameronmd.com/lyme-disease-triggers-hearing-loss/

LYME DISEASE AND SUDDEN ONSET HEARING LOSS

lyme-disease-sudden-onset-hearing-loss

An article by Sowula and colleagues, published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, describes nine patients with Lyme disease who had sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), also referred to as sudden deafness.[1]

By 

The study aimed to assess the prevalence of this type of sudden onset hearing loss, particularly among Lyme disease patients. The authors explain, “Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is defined as sensorineural hearing loss of 30 dB or more over at least three adjacent audiometric frequencies occurring within a 72-h period of time.”

This type of sudden onset hearing loss can be caused by a viral infection, vascular insufficiency, autoimmune disorder, neoplasm, stroke and irradiation. 

Treatment is directed towards the cause with standard therapy typically involving corticosteroid, vasodilators, and ionotropic agents, the authors write. Unfortunately, the cause is unknown in 90% of the cases.

The study looked at 86 patients who were hospitalized, between 2017 and 2018, due to sudden sensorineural hearing loss. As part of their evaluation for sudden onset hearing loss, patients were tested for Lyme disease.

Out of 86 patients, 9 tested positive for Lyme disease. Other studies, however, indicate that up to 21% of patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss test positive for Lyme disease, the authors write.

Hearing loss patients with Lyme disease

On average, the 9 patients were around 47 years old, with an age range between 30 and 70. None of the Lyme disease patients responded to intravenous corticosteroids, microcirculatory drugs, or ionotropic drugs.

Seven of the nine patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss were treated with oral doxycycline or intravenous ceftriaxone.  

Four patients were treated with doxycycline. Hearing improved by 10dB for one of the patients.

Complete hearing recovery with IV ceftriaxone

The remaining 3 patients, who were treated with intravenous ceftriaxone, had complete improvement in their hearing loss.  

“Those three patients reported a complete recovery of hearing (PTA shows respectively 15.20 dB HL for low frequency and 28.35 dB HL for high frequency),” the authors write.

“Infections caused by Borrelia burgdorferi may contribute to the development of inflammatory and angiopathic lesions, which are a possible cause of [sudden sensorineural hearing loss].”

Unfortunately, 2 patients were left with high-frequency tinnitus. “In these patients, tinnitus was present from the beginning of the disease,” the authors write.

The group of 9 Lyme disease patients “was treated with antibiotics and experienced partial or complete regression of their deafness,” the authors conclude. “This may suggest a relationship between [sudden sensorineural hearing loss] and Lyme disease.”

“The longer the duration of the infection, the greater the likelihood of permanent and irreversible changes in the vessels of the cochlea or auditory nerve,” the authors caution.

Related Article:

Lyme disease patient with permanent tinnitus and hearing loss

References:
  1. Sowula K, Szaleniec J, Stolcman K, Ceranowicz P, Kocon S, Tomik J. Association between Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Lyme Disease. J Clin Med. Mar 8 2021;10(5)doi:10.3390/jcm10051130

___________________

For more:

Category:

Hearing Loss, Lyme, research