Archive for the ‘research’ Category

Help Make “The Rash” By Walter Kirn

Not to be confused with the EM rash sometimes present with Lyme disease…..

https://brownstone.org/articles/help-make-the-rash-by-walter-kirn/

Help Make “The Rash” by Walter Kirn

Player Image

There are two possible ways history will treat the Covid era.

The establishment preference is for a story of a killer pathogen that leapt from the animal kingdom into humans to create a deadly pandemic that was fixed by an innovative vaccine. This is the preferred line in shrunken form, one already told in countless books and articles. This is how regime historians – cowards who stood by and watched while people were treated like lab rats – want to tell the story.

The real version of events is far more complicated. It is a story of dangerous scientific experiments mixed with misleading propaganda, mass psychosis, and outright lies, and given forward motion by profiteering pharmaceutical companies, censorial media, government grift, opportunistic bureaucrats, and agency malfeasance.

It is also a story of great heroes who stood up and said no.

Who will tell the real story in a way that can cut through the static?

Many documentaries already exist to get the truth out, but much more is needed. What we need is a narrative, a metaphorical telling, a quasi-historical fiction that puts all the absurdity on display in a slightly changed framework. Ideally, this story would exist in its most compelling form as a satirical film. 

The master of this genre is literary critic, author, and screenwriter Walter Kirn, a living treasure of cultural commentary. He was educated at Princeton University and Oxford University, he achieved literary success with novels such as Thumbsucker (1999), adapted into a 2005 film, and Up in the Air (2001), which was adapted into a 2009 film nominated for six Academy Awards including Best Picture.

His 2014 memoir Blood Will Out chronicles a decade-long friendship with Christian Gerhartsreiter, an impostor who posed as Clark Rockefeller and was later convicted of murder. (See link for article and more on The Rash)

Can Cochrane’s New CEO Save the Sinking Ship?

https://brownstone.org/articles/can-cochranes-new-ceo-save-the-sinking-ship/

Can Cochrane’s New CEO Save the Sinking Ship?

Player Image

Article Excerpts:

The Cochrane Collaboration is a grassroots organisation founded in 1993. It publishes systematic reviews of healthcare interventions and was highly successful until British journalist Mark Wilson became CEO in 2012. A major medical journal expressed concern that someone with no health care experience was leading one of the foremost organisations dedicated to ensuring good clinical decisions.1 Wilson made the organisation highly ineffective and bureaucratic, and his actions harmed Cochrane’s mission about ensuring high scientific standards.2-4

The problems mounted, and in April 2021, Wilson suddenly left his job, a week before Cochrane’s largest funder, the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) in the UK, announced a major budget cut.5 The funder criticised the poor scientific quality of Cochrane reviews, “a point raised by people in the Collaboration to ensure that garbage does not go into the reviews; otherwise, your reviews will be garbage.”2 Only four months later, the NIHR declared that the funding would stop in March 2023. When that happened, Cochrane was in big disarray, but the huge bureaucracy and the poor scientific standard continued nonetheless.2

I shall discuss 11 cases that stem from my personal experiences and those of Tom Jefferson, one of my previous employees, starting in 2015 when Soares-Weiser became Deputy Editor-in-Chief and got a substantial say about the standard of Cochrane reviews (she became Editor-in-Chief in 2019).12 But first, I shall describe a stunning affair in 2013. (See link for article)

_____________

**Comment**

I highly recommend listening to Gøtzsche’s Survival of a Whistleblower to understand what is at stake for speaking out about industry corruption and conflicts of interest.  Gøtzsche certainly has paid the price as have many others throughout history.  We are indebted to those who uphold ethics in a time when it’s always easier to follow the crowd.

As a founding member, Gøtzsche was expelled from the Cochrane group he helped create. Four board members promptly resigned in protest.  He states that within the group, academic freedom has gone, scientific debates are unwelcome, and transparency is a thing of the past. 

The reason for the expulsion?

He challenged the leadership on core issues and on the way it was managing the charity.

He warned that flu ‘vaccine’ research is corrupted.  He also took issue with HPV research charging it may have overlooked side effects.

Proving without a shadow of doubt: it is verboten to question anything about ‘vaccines.’

Gøtzsche is widely known for his fierce attacks on Big Pharma and his criticism of medical interventions he deems useless or harmful. He wrote a controversial book about what he says is the overuse of mammography in breast cancer screening, and in another book likened Pharma to “organized crime.”

This man steps on ALL the toes of the beast.

In short, he states that if Cochrane can not find an ethical CEO, it illustrates how far the organization has sunk morally and scientifically.

“In science, there can be no compromises when these loyalties clash, even if members of the club may feel you don’t respect them or their authority.” ~ Dr. Peter Gøtzsche

 

 

White Clot Science

http://

White Clot Science

Dr. John Campbell

2/21/26

Breaking Research Decodes the Mystery of “The Rubbery White Clots”

First time, comprehensively characterized the anomalous intravascular casts (AICs), commonly reported by embalmers worldwide as strange, rubbery white clots.
Research, significantly funded by New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (NZDSOS), provides definitive analysis that these structures are a previously unrecognized and abnormal form of intravascular clotting.
Since 2021, global reports, from embalmers and some clinicians have described the retrieval of long, elastic, white fibrous structures from blood vessels, distinct from ordinary post-mortem clots. New three-part study, using international labs on three continents, describes their structure, elemental composition and protein makeup. Concluding they represent a novel and persistent pathological entity.
Key Findings of the Trilogy:
Paper 1: Morphology & Histology https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/… Established that AICs are not ordinary clots. They are elastic, lumen-conforming, branched structures that form under active blood flow (shown by partial “Lines of Zahn”), yet are strikingly devoid of intact red blood cells and platelets. Their rubber-like consistency and cohesive strength are incompatible with known pre- and post-mortem changes. Lines of Zahn characteristic of thrombus formed at the site of rapid arterial blood flow, with laminations produced by successive deposition of platelets and fibrin (pale layers), alternating with red blood cells (dark layers).
Paper 2: Elemental Analysis https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/… Revealed the clots have a bizarre chemical fingerprint. They are depleted in sulphur (a key marker of protein) and enriched in phosphorus, a composition impossible for a normal, protein-dominant fibrin clot. This indicates a hybrid organic-inorganic matrix, not a simple blood clot.
Paper 3: Proteomic Analysis https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/… Solved the protein puzzle. While the clots do contain fibrinogen, the building block of normal clots, the fibrin chains are in a very abnormal ratio (~1:7:3 for α:β:γ chains vs. the normal 1:1:1). Critically, they are almost completely lacking in plasminogen (the enzyme required to break down clots), explaining their stubborn persistence. The protein profile also shows signs of inflammatory and immune system involvement as well as red cell destruction.
Senior Researcher Dr Bruce Rapley:
“This is not just a big blood clot. This is a fundamentally different architecture. The profound deficiency in plasminogen is like building a structure impervious to future demolition – it’s designed to persist. The elemental data confirms it’s not just protein; it’s a hybrid material our bodies are forced to make but not equipped to clear.”
This holds a significant health implication. The researchers note that the formation of such persistent, obstructing material in blood vessels, particularly if in the microvasculature, will lead to chronic oxygen lack, organ damage, pain, exhaustion, and cascades of inflammatory pathology.
The study concludes that AICs anomalous intravascular casts:
“provide a mechanistically coherent explanation for persistent vascular obstruction, impaired tissue perfusion, inflammation, and a broad spectrum of acute and chronic organ dysfunction.”
A Call for Urgent Investigation: The paper highlights the covid injections as a crucial research direction:
“If spike protein were demonstrated to provoke anomalous intravascular casts, this would raise serious implications not only for covid pathophysiology but also for genetic platforms that induce sustained host manufacture of spike protein, making it imperative that this potential association be rigorously investigated.”
Dr Shelton:
“This analysis puts substance to the observations our organization has been highlighting for 4 years now.  These are not ‘normal’ clots.  This work adds to the scientific basis for the persistent symptoms and deaths since the rollouts, and strengthens our many calls to halt the covid injections pending further investigation. We thank supporters for enabling this work and urge the global medical community to take these findings seriously. Already these results are enabling rapid strides in showing how these harmful structures were predictable from first principles.”
The scientific papers are available on the preprint server and at www.nzdsos.com for review.
**Comment**
Sadly, all the accumulating science doesn’t appear to be making a difference as ‘vaccine’ disciples continue to push these unsafe and ineffective products that are maiming and killing people.
For more:

Podcast: Why Lyme Disease Happens to Some People and Not Others

https://www.lymedisease.org/why-lyme-happens-some-not-others/  Go here for video

PODCAST: Why Lyme disease happens to some people and not others

By Fred Diamond

One of the most common questions I hear from Lyme survivors is simple but deeply loaded: “Why did this happen to me? Why did I get Lyme when others didn’t?”

If you’ve ever asked yourself, “Why me?” know that you’re not alone.

Thousands of Lyme survivors have pondered that same question. They were healthy. They were hiking. They were gardening. They were kayaking. They were simply living their lives. And then something changed.

On this week’s Love, Hope, Lyme podcast, Dr. Jennifer Miller of Galaxy Diagnostics, a scientist who has spent her career studying the Lyme bacterium, Borrelia burgdorferi, discusses why Lyme happens and why its effect may differ from person to person.

Her explanation reveals just how complex, and insidiously strategic, this organism truly is.

It starts in the wild

Lyme disease is what scientists call a vector-borne infection. In simple terms, that means it is transmitted by a vector and in this case, ticks.

But ticks are not born infected.

“The tick has to pick it up from a host that’s already infected,” Dr. Miller explains. “The larval tick will feed on an infected animal… and acquire the infection.”

That infected animal is usually a small mammal such as a mouse, chipmunk, or squirrel. These animals act as reservoir hosts. They carry the bacteria without becoming visibly sick.

After feeding, the tick molts into a nymph which is the stage most responsible for transmitting Lyme to humans. Nymphs are tiny, often no bigger than a poppy seed, and difficult to detect.

Many people assume deer are the main source of Lyme. Dr. Miller clarifies the nuance.

“Deer can have Lyme disease, but people aren’t going to get it from a deer.”

Deer play a role in the tick life cycle, but they are not the direct cause of human infection. The real issue is ecological.

“Because we have all these reservoir hosts, it’s a big part of the problem as to why Lyme disease incidence is increasing and why it’s spreading,” she says. “As humans, we occupy and consume more and more space… we’re encroaching on the territory of the deer, and with that, very unfortunately, comes Lyme disease.”

In other words, Lyme is not random. It is the byproduct of an expanding interface between humans and the natural infection cycle.

Borrelia is not an ordinary bacterium

Lyme disease is caused by a bacterium, not a virus, but it behaves unlike most bacteria.

Borrelia belongs to a family called spirochetes. It has a corkscrew shape that gives it unusual mobility.

“Borrelia will literally outrun the immune system,” Dr. Miller says. “Because it’s a corkscrew, it literally will burrow into the tissues.”

That corkscrew motion allows it to penetrate deeply into connective tissue, joints, and even cross protective barriers like the blood-brain barrier.

Even more concerning, Borrelia is highly adaptive.

“It literally will coat itself with host proteins. That allows it to evade immune detection.”

Camouflage

In essence, the bacterium can camouflage itself. It changes the proteins on its surface depending on whether it is inside a tick or inside a human. Once inside the body, it can alter its “coat” again to hide from immune surveillance.

Unlike some bacteria that cause disease by releasing toxins, Borrelia’s damage often comes indirectly.

“They’re not making toxins or poisons like other bacteria,” Dr. Miller explains. “But a lot of what happens with Borrelia is triggered by the immune system.”

The medical literature uses the phrase immune dysregulation to describe this phenomenon.

“Borrelia really interferes with the immune system,” she says.

In some individuals, the immune response becomes excessive and inflammatory, leading to joint damage, neurological symptoms, and widespread pain. In others, the immune response is blunted or misdirected, allowing the bacterium to persist quietly.

Why do some people get so sick while others don’t?

This may be the most painful question Lyme survivors ask.

“That’s still the biggest question that we need to answer,” Dr. Miller says candidly. “What I’ll tell you quite openly is that we don’t have all the answers.”

But there are clues.

Different strains of Borrelia produce slightly different surface proteins.

“Depending on which version of those proteins they’re making, some of those versions disagree with certain humans more than others.”

Some strains provoke a strong immune reaction. Others may slip past immune detection more easily.

Borrelia also actively interferes with antibody production.

“Borrelia will interfere with the timing of the antibody response. It interferes with the strength of the antibody response,” she explains. “It will trick them and confuse them so that they don’t produce antibodies in the right timeframe or of the right strength.”

This has enormous implications. If the immune system does not respond in a predictable way, both symptoms and laboratory tests become harder to interpret.

Host factors matter too. Genetics, previous infections such as Epstein-Barr virus, co-infections, mold exposure, chronic stress, and environmental burdens may all influence how a person responds.

There is likely no single reason why one person clears infection and another develops chronic symptoms. It is a complex interaction between pathogen and host.

The complication of co-infections

Lyme rarely travels alone.

“The number of different pathogens that were in the tick was far more than anybody would’ve thought… easily dozens,” Dr. Miller notes.

Ticks may carry Borrelia along with Babesia (a parasite similar in some ways to malaria), Bartonella (a different type of bacteria), Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, and even viral pathogens.

“You really have a lot of diversity of pathogens with these co-infections. That’s part of why they can be so very difficult to treat.”

A tick can acquire pathogens from one animal, survive the molt, then feed on another animal and acquire additional organisms. Birds, which can transport infected ticks across geographic regions, add another layer of complexity.

This microbial diversity means that two people bitten by ticks in different environments may experience very different symptom patterns.

Why testing fails so often

Few topics frustrate Lyme patients more than testing.

The standard two-tier antibody testing protocol has been in use for more than three decades. It measures antibodies but not the bacteria itself.

“The current tests are detecting that antibody response, and that can be very tricky,” Dr. Miller explains.

Antibodies only tell you that your immune system has seen the pathogen at some point. They do not reliably indicate active infection. And because Borrelia interferes with antibody production, some people never produce a strong enough response to meet diagnostic thresholds.

“Not everybody even generates an antibody response to Borrelia, one that’s strong enough or in line with what our out-of-date tests measure.”

False negatives can occur. Partial antibody bands may appear but not meet reporting criteria. Cross-reactivity with other infections can create additional confusion.

Adding to the challenge, Borrelia does not remain in high concentrations in the bloodstream.

“They don’t hide out at large numbers in the blood. There’s just not a lot of Borrelia in the blood.”

After transmission through the skin, the bacteria migrate into tissues. Blood-based detection becomes inherently difficult. This is why some researchers are working to develop direct detection methods, including antigen testing strategies.

“Borrelia are unique,” Dr. Miller explains. “When Borrelia shed their outer proteins it just gets released into the environment.”

Unlike many bacteria, Borrelia sheds structural components that may be detectable in other bodily fluids, offering a potential alternative to antibody-based testing.

A final word to patients

Lyme disease is biologically complex. It is ecologically driven. It is immunologically disruptive, and it does not behave like many other infections.

The science is still evolving. Researchers do not have all the answers.

But one thing is clear.

“If you think you have symptoms of Lyme disease and you haven’t seen a tick and you don’t have that bull’s-eye rash, please don’t assume that you don’t have Lyme disease,” Dr. Miller urges. “Go and get checked out.”

For survivors searching for understanding, the question why did this happen may never have a simple answer. But understanding biology, ticks, the bacterium, the immune system, and the co-infections can bring clarity.

And the more we understand that organism, the closer we move toward better diagnostics, better treatments, and better outcomes for every Lyme survivor.

Visit the Galaxy Diagnostics website to learn more about Lyme disease testing.

Click here to listen to all episodes of the Love, Hope, Lyme Podcast or on YouTube.

Coinfection in Lyme Disease: Clinical Impact, Diagnostic Challenges, and Therapeutic Perspectives

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/14/2/325

Tick-Borne Co-Infection in Lyme Disease: Clinical Impact, Diagnostic Challenges, and Therapeutic Perspectives

by Georgi Popov, Dzhaner Bashchobanov* and Radina Andonova
Clinic of Infectious Diseases, Sofiamed Hospital, 1797 Sofia, Bulgaria
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Microorganisms 202614(2), 325; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms14020325
Submission received: 8 January 2026 / Revised: 27 January 2026 / Accepted: 28 January 2026 / Published: 30 January 2026
Abstract
Tick-borne co-infections are an increasingly recognized and clinically important aspect of Lyme borreliosis, particularly in regions where Ixodes ticks transmit a wide range of bacterial, protozoan, and viral pathogens. In addition to Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, these ticks frequently harbor microorganisms such as Babesia spp.,   Anaplasma phagocytophilumEhrlichia spp., Borrelia miyamotoiBartonella spp., and several tick-borne viruses. Co-infections may increase disease severity, prolong symptom duration, and contribute to atypical or overlapping clinical presentations, thereby complicating diagnosis and management. Growing evidence from epidemiological studies, clinical case series, and experimental in vivo and in vitro models indicates that pathogen–pathogen and pathogen–host interactions can modulate immune responses and influence disease progression. Diagnostic challenges arise from non-specific clinical features and limitations of current laboratory methods. From a therapeutic perspective, although standard antibiotic regimens for Lyme disease are effective against some bacterial co-infections, they do not provide coverage for protozoan or viral agents, necessitating pathogen-specific and, in some cases, combination treatment strategies. This review synthesizes current knowledge on the epidemiology, clinical impact, diagnostic limitations, and treatment approaches for tick-borne co-infections associated with Lyme disease, and highlights critical evidence gaps and future research directions to improve patient outcomes.
For more: