Archive for the ‘research’ Category

Review: Borrelia Miyamotoi

https://danielcameronmd.com/review-borrelia-miyamotoi/

REVIEW: BORRELIA MIYAMOTOI

borrelia-miyamotoi

Borrelia miyamotoi is an emerging tick-borne illness that is transmitted by the deer tick. The most common symptoms of a B. miyamotoi infection include fever, fatigue, headache, chills, myalgia, arthralgia, and nausea.

In their article, “Human Borrelia miyamotoi Infection in North America,” Burde and colleagues discuss the frequency and location of infection in ticks and people, clinical presentation and complications, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.

Prevalence of B. miyamotoi

B. miyamotoi-infected ticks have been reported throughout the northeastern, northern Midwestern, and western United States. They’ve also been detected in all Canadian provinces except Newfoundland and Labrador.

The prevalence of Borrelia miyamotoi infections is difficult to determine, since the illness is not nationally reportable in the U.S. but reportable in only a few states including Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Vermont, and Wisconsin. And, confirmation of the diagnosis depends upon laboratory testing, which is not always available.

Furthermore, diagnosis can be challenging. “The discrepancy between diagnosed and undiagnosed infection is probably even greater for B. miyamotoi, a tick-borne disease that lacks an easily identifiable clinical marker, such as the erythema migrans rash, and is less well known by health care workers and the general public,” the authors write.

Transmission

B. miyamotoi can be transmitted to humans through the bite of an infected black-legged (deer) tick. Several studies have found that it may be transmitted through blood transfusions, as well.

The B. miyamotoi pathogen can be transmitted from an infected female tick to her eggs, which may result in some larval ticks harboring the infection and transmitting it to a host. “Other larvae become infected after taking a blood meal on an infected mouse reservoir host, molt to the nymphal stage, and then transmit infection to another mouse or human,” they write.

Symptoms & Treatment

B. miyamotoi symptoms can be non-specific and an individual may appear to have a viral-like illness with fever, chills, headache, myalgia, fatigue, arthralgia, and gastrointestinal complaints, according to the authors.

“The most striking clinical feature of B. miyamotoi is relapsing fever with an initial febrile episode followed by a period of wellness and then one or more additional febrile episodes,” the authors write.

Some studies have found that the “average time between relapses was 9 days with a range of 2 days to 2 weeks.”

However, not all individuals develop relapsing fever. “In the largest case series of B. miyamotoi cases in the US, only 2 of 51 cases (4%) developed relapsing fever.”

READ: Don’t Rely on Relapsing Fever to Diagnose B. miyamotoi 

Treatment of B. miyamotoi disease typically involves using the same antibiotics to treat Lyme disease: doxycycline, tetracycline, erythromycin, penicillin, and ceftriaxone. However, there have been no trials to evaluate the effectiveness of these treatments.

Co-infections worsen disease

Co-infections can worsen the illness. There have been reported cases of B. miyamotoi co-infection with B. burgdorferi and/or Babesia microti.

“Previous studies have found that coinfection of B. burgdorferi with either Babesia microti or with Anaplasma phagocytophilum are often associated with more severe disease compared with that caused by B. burgdorferi infection alone,” the authors write.

Testing for the infection can include blood smear, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and/or antibody detection.

Authors’ Conclude:

“The possibility of B. miyamotoi infection should be considered in any patient with a febrile illness who resides in or has recently traveled to a region where Lyme disease is endemic, especially during the late spring, summer, or early fall.”

References:
  1. Burde J, Bloch EM, Kelly JR, Krause PJ. Human Borrelia miyamotoi Infection in North America. Pathogens. 2023 Apr 3;12(4):553. doi: 10.3390/pathogens12040553. PMID: 37111439; PMCID: PMC10145171.

_______________

For more:

Since Borrelia miyamotoi is not a reportable illness to the CDC, no one has any clue about prevalence but reports are coming in continually that it’s highly likely to be a much bigger problem than ‘authorities’ believe.
It was recently discovered that:

Also, Borrelia miyamotoi has been in California ticks for a long time:

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/02/15/b-miyamotoi-in-ca-ticks-for-a-long-time/

The following case shows how you can become infected while traveling:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/10/24/a-case-of-borrelia-miyamotoi/

Chronic Pain Reprograms Our Immune Systems & Our Brains

https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/chronic-pain-reprograms-our-immune?

Chronic Pain Reprograms Our Immune Systems and Our Brains

A fascinating study from McGill University suggests that parallel changes methylation occur in both our brains and in our T-cells

James Lyons-Weiler

Oct. 13, 2023

A study from McGill University, titled “Chronic pain changes our immune systems,”, published in the journal Scientific Reports, reveals that chronic pain can alter the way genes function in the immune system. Specifically, the research found that chronic pain changes the DNA marking not only in the brain but also in T cells, which are a type of white blood cell essential for immunity.

The study used rat models and examined DNA from their brains and white blood cells. The researchers mapped DNA marking by a chemical called a methyl group, which is crucial for regulating gene function. This area of study falls under the growing field of epigenetics, which involves modifications that turn genes ‘on’ or ‘off,’ effectively reprogramming how they work.

The researchers were surprised by the extensive number of genes that were marked by chronic pain, ranging from hundreds to thousands. These findings could have implications for other systems in the body that are not normally associated with pain. The study suggests that understanding these epigenetic changes could open new avenues for diagnosing and treating chronic pain.  (See link for article)

_____________

Important excerpt from the study:

This study supports the plausibility of DNA methylation involvement in chronic pain and demonstrates the potential feasibility of DNA methylation markers in T cells as noninvasive biomarkers of chronic pain susceptibility.

For more:

Analysis of Bacteria in Tropical Cattle Tick

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10493-023-00851-x

ResearchPublished: 

Analysis of the bacterial community in female Rhipicephalus microplus ticks from selected provinces in Luzon, Philippines, using next-generation sequencing

Sheane Andrea V. HernandezSaubel Ezrael A. Salamat & Remil L. Galay

Abstract

Analysis of the tick microbiome can help understand tick–symbiont interactions and identify undiscovered pathogens, which may aid in implementing control of ticks and tick-borne diseases. The tropical cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus is a widespread ectoparasite of cattle in the Philippines, negatively affecting animal productivity and health. This study characterized the bacterial community of R. microplus from Luzon, Philippines, through next-generation sequencing of 16s rRNA. DNA was extracted from 45 partially engorged female ticks from nine provinces. The DNA samples were pooled per province and then sequenced and analyzed using an open-source bioinformatics platform. In total, 667 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) were identified. The ticks in all nine provinces were found to have CoxiellaCorynebacteriumStaphylococcus, and Acinetobacter. Basic local alignment search tool (BLAST) analysis revealed the presence of known pathogens of cattle, such as BartonellaEhrlichia minasensis, and Dermatophilus congolensis. The tick samples from Laguna, Quezon, and Batangas had the most diverse bacterial species, whereas the tick samples from Ilocos Norte had the lowest diversity. Similarities in the composition of the bacterial community in ticks from provinces near each other were also observed. This is the first study on metagenomic analysis of cattle ticks in the Philippines, providing new insights that may be useful for controlling ticks and tick-borne diseases.

For more:

Babesia Concurrent With Multiple Abscesses From Staph Infection: A Case Report

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844023057717

Aug. 2023, e18563

Babesiosis concurrent with multiple abscesses from Staphylococcus aureus infection: A case report

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18563Get rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license
open access

Abstract

Background

Babesiosis is a tick-borne illness. These patients may have signs of a systemic inflammatory response, but abscess formation is unusual. Multiple abscesses in a patient with confirmed babesiosis is very rare, so concurrent infection by another pathogen should be considered.

Case presentation

We report a 42-year-old male patient who had fever, chills, joint pain, abdominal pain, and altered mental status after a possible tick bite on his right foot while fishing in a river. The laboratory tests, including a blood smear, suggested babesiosis. Imaging studies showed multiple brain and spleen abscesses due to Staphylococcus aureus based on the results of a blood culture and next-generation sequencing. The patient eventually recovered after treatment with azithromycinfosfomycin, and vancomycin.

Conclusion

Concurrent bacterial infection can occur in a patient with babesiosis. Additional tests should be performed when a babesiosis patient presents with signs inconsistent with Babesia infection. Prompt and appropriate treatment is necessary and may be life-saving for these patients.

For more:

Biggest Cover Up in Medical History: Origin of COVID-19

https://www.scientificfreedom.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Gotzsche-Origin-of-COVID-19-The-biggest-cover-up-in-medical-history.pdf

Origin of COVID-19: The biggest cover up in medical history

By Peter C Gøtzsche

Institute for Scientific Freedom Copenhagen

6 October 2023

When the COVID-19 pandemic spread all over the world in early 2020, the Chinese government covered up its origin.1,2 The Chinese cover up quickly extended to US academics with conflicts of interest, prestigious medical journals, the media, and the key advisor to the US President, Anthony Fauci.

It was an orchestrated effort to hide the obvious, which was too painful to admit, that the pandemic was highly likely caused by a lab leak in Wuhan, and that the virus, SARS-CoV-2, was highly likely manufactured at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.1 In this lab, researchers take a harmless virus and make it deadly by genetic modification in so-called gain-of-function experiments.

The cover up was highly effective. It shaped the public opinion that the virus had a natural origin and had spread from animals to humans, even though not a single thread of evidence in support of this idea has ever been produced. Chinese censorship and threats against those who knew better1 won the first round but the game has now been lost.

According to multiple US government officials interviewed as part of a lengthy investigation in 2023, the first three people infected by the virus and who were all admitted to hospital have now been named.3 They all worked in the lab where they did gain-of-function experiments including Ben Hu who led this research. One US investigator said: “We were rock-solid confident that this was likely COVID-19 … They’re trained biologists in their thirties and forties. Thirty-five-year-old scientists don’t get very sick with influenza.”4 One of the researchers’ family members later died.

Furthermore, on 19 November 2019, the safety director of the Chinese Academy of Sciences made a visit, according to the institute’s website. He addressed a meeting of the institute’s leadership with important “oral and written” instructions from China’s president, Xi Jinping, regarding “a complex and grave situation.”4

When the Wuhan Institute put out their first paper about the pandemic virus, they failed to point out the novel furin cleavage site despite having had plans to insert this and also did insert it in SARS-like viruses in their lab. A molecular biologist from Harvard said that “It’s as if these scientists proposed putting horns on horses, but when a unicorn shows up in their city a year later, they write a paper describing every part of it except its horn.”3

The US role in the cover up

China was not alone in leading the whole world astray. Newly released emails and messages reveal that US top scientists lied to Congress during a hearing in July 2023 and also lied profusely about the concerns they had in early 2020 that the pandemic might very well have been due to a lab leak of a virus manufactured with financial support from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). 5

Without any evidence, Robert Garry told Congress that the virus had emerged in nature and not from a lab. Kristian Andersen denounced Republicans for spreading a “conspiracy theory” that he and Garry had worked with Presidential advisor Anthony Fauci in early 2020 to produce disinformation about COVID’s origin in their 17 March 2020 Nature Medicine paper, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV2.”6

The authors wrote that, “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.” Their analyses didn’t show anything; it was just rhetoric, and a group of 14 concerned scientists documented that Andersen et al.’s arguments were logically flawed.7 In my view, the article in Nature Medicine is fraudulent and should be retracted because one of the definitions of scientific misconduct involves deliberate distortion of the results.

The paper had an enormous influence on shaping public opinion and has been viewed nearly six million times.5 When I investigated what the social medias’ so-called fact checkers said about the origin of the virus, I quickly found a fact check that called it false that someone had said that the virus had been manipulated, explaining that “experts have refuted the claim that the virus is not naturally occurring.”1 The source of this refutation was the nonsense in Nature Medicine.

Other fact checkers were equally gullible. When one of my colleagues posted a message on Facebook about one of the best articles ever written about the origin of the pandemic, from May 2021,8 his post was first labelled “Missing context,” and next it was removed.1 Again, they referred to Andersen and colleagues and they used superlatives to further their case, e.g. the 27 people that signed a highly misleading Lancet letter (see below) were called eminent scientists.

It was not a “conspiracy theory” that Andersen had worked with Fauci and other “higher ups” when he decided to spread misinformation. It is a fact.5 Pressure from “higher ups” led Andersen and Garry to abandon the lab leak theory as implausible. Moreover, the newly released documents reveal that Andersen still suspected that a lab leak of a manufactured virus was possible a month after Nature Medicine published their article, and two months after they published a preprint.

Their U-turn made some “higher ups” happy. On 16 April 2020, NIH Director Francis Collins emailed Fauci that he hoped the Nature Medicine article “would settle this … Wondering if there is something NIH can do to help put down this very destructive conspiracy.”5

Andersen explained to Congress that his sudden change in belief in early February 2020 was based on “many factors, including additional data, analyses, learning more about coronaviruses, and discussions with colleagues and collaborators.”5

This wasn’t true. Andersen wrote on 1 February 2020: “I think the main thing still in my mind is that the lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario.” The newly released messages reveal nearly 60 clear statements between 31 January and 28 February 2020 by Andersen and his colleagues expressing their belief that a lab leak, and the bioengineering of viruses, were the origin of COVID-19.5

In early February, Andersen and his co-authors agreed that the features they observed in SARS-CoV-2 exhibited exactly the steps they would have taken if they themselves had decided to engineer an infectious SARS-like coronavirus.5 A key piece of evidence that the virus was highly likely engineered is the furin cleavage site on the spike protein, which allows SARS-CoV-2 to bind to 3 human receptor sites, making the virus highly infectious. This is extremely unlikely to have occurred by chance, i.e. via mutations.1

Thus, Andersen and his colleagues were not simply following the additional data or analyses, as he claimed in 2023 but actively sought to discredit the lab leak, conceal information, deceive journalists, and mislead the public in 2020.

On 17 April 2020, Fauci described Andersen’s article at a White House press briefing without disclosing his close involvement with the production of it. 5 He even claimed he didn’t have the authors’ names, which was untruthful. For example, on 1 February, Andersen and his co-authors had a conference call with Fauci and Collins who used the opportunity to “prompt” them to write the Nature Medicine paper.

The cover up was so deliberate that key people, including Andersen, tried to evade public scrutiny by not using email. A top Fauci advisor boasted of evading Freedom of Information Act requests by using Gmail and hiding Fauci’s role; “Tony doesn’t want his fingerprints on origin stories … Don’t worry … I will delete anything I don’t want to see in the New York Times.”5

But they were caught. On 6 February 2020, Andersen changed the name of the Slack channel from “project-wuhan engineering” to “project-wuhan pangolin. However, their attempts at making pangolins responsible for the pandemic failed totally. On 12 February, four days before the authors published their preprint, Andersen confessed on Slack: “For all I know, people could have infected the pangolin, not the other way.”

In Congress in 2023, Andersen claimed he had changed his mind based on the scientific evidence that an intermediary animal host, such as a pangolin, was possible, but the internal communications show that he lied.

Andersen and his colleagues wrote in their Nature Medicine article that “The presence in pangolins of an RBD [receptor binding domain] very similar to that of SARS-CoV-2 means that we can infer this was also probably in the virus that jumped to humans.” 6 But two days after the preprint publication, Andersen once again admitted, “Clearly none of these pangolin sequences was the source though.” And on 20 February, Andersen emphasized that “Unfortunately the pangolins don’t help clarify the story.”5

On 16 April, Andersen again expressed concerns that the virus might have been produced in the Wuhan lab. However, just one week later, Edward Holmes, one of Andersen’s co-authors, disparaged “lab escape conspiracy theories” on Twitter. 5

There were other revelations of the authors’ extreme dishonesty. In early February, a New York Times reporter, Don McNeil, was asking tough questions about whether COVID-19 may have come from a lab. Andersen and his co-authors deliberately planned to misinform McNeil and one of them said: “I am thinking of just replying and saying that ‘I see nothing in the genome that would make me believe it has been genetically manipulated in a lab.’”5

Anthony Fauci’s role was also deplorable. He visited CIA headquarters to “influence” its review of COVID-19 origins, the House Oversight Committee reported. 9 Seven CIA analysts with significant scientific expertise related to COVID-19 received performance bonuses after changing a report to downplay concerns about a possible lab origin of the virus. The CIA purposely did not “badge” Fauci in and out of the building so as to hide any record that he had been there.

A CIA whistleblower revealed that Fauci not only visited the CIA but also pushed the Nature Medicine paper, in meetings at the State Department and the White House in an effort to steer government officials away from looking into the possibility that COVID-19 escaped from a lab.

Fauci had reasons to push scientists and intelligence analysts to believe the virus had a zoonotic origin since his agency had issued a grant to fund the dangerous research in Wuhan.1

The involvement of the Chinese military

A detailed investigation published in June 2023 by The Times demonstrates the involvement of the Chinese military in the gain-of-function research, which it funded.4 Some of this research was covert, as it never came to the attention of the US collaborators, e.g. Peter Daszak. US investigators said that the purpose was to produce bioweapons, and, indeed, a book published in 2015 by the military academy discusses how SARS viruses represent a “new era of genetic weapons” that can be “artificially manipulated into an emerging human disease virus, then weaponised and unleashed.” Clearly, if a country could vaccinate its population against its own secret and deadly virus, it might have a weapon to shift the balance of world power.

The People’s Liberation Army, as it is euphemistically called even though it killed its own people at the Tiananmen massacre in 1989, 1 had its own vaccine specialist, Zhou Yusen, a decorated military scientist at the Academy of Military Medical Sciences, who had collaborated with the Wuhan scientists. 4 Suspicion fell on him after the pandemic because he produced a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine with remarkable speed in February 2020.

In May 2020, aged just 54, Zhou appears to have died, a fact mentioned only in passing in a Chinesemedia report and in a scientific paper that placed the word “deceased” in brackets after his name. Witnesses are said to have told the US investigation that Zhou fell from the roof of the Wuhan institute, although this has not been verified.

In one of the animal experiments, the scientists had created a highly infectious super-coronavirus with a terrifying kill-rate that in all probability would never have emerged in nature. In just two weeks, the mutant virus killed 6 out of 8 mice and just after the infection, the mice’s human-like lungs were found to contain a viral load up to 10,000 times greater than the original virus.

When Daszak filed a grant renewal application to the NIH, he did not mention the deaths but claimed that the mice had experienced “mild SARS-like clinical signs” when they were infected with the mutant virus. He eventually provided details of the experiment’s deadly results to the US authorities in a report after the COVID-19 pandemic and now claimed that his 2018 statement about the “mild” illness was based on preliminary results – even though the experiment had taken place several months before he issued the false statement.

The US investigators spoke to two researchers working at a US laboratory who were collaborating with the Wuhan institute at the time of the outbreak. They said the Wuhan scientists had inserted furin cleavage sites into viruses in 2019 in exactly the way proposed in Daszak’s failed funding application. They also saw evidence that the institute was conducting “serial passaging” experiments whereby the most damaging virus strain is selected for repeat experiments to produce a deadly strain much more quickly than what would be possible based on natural evolution.

The Lancet’s role in the cover up

On 19 February 2020, a group of virologists and others published a Lancet letter, which derailed the debate about the origin of COVID-19.10 This was the darkest moment in science in my lifetime and I have described the issues in detail in a book.1

Peter Daszak secretly organised and drafted the Lancet letter. The worst part of the letter was this: “The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin … Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.”

There was no sharing of data. China hid everything that could incriminate them as being responsible for the pandemic through reckless experimenting with corona viruses and also disregarding the safety instructions in the lab.1

It is appalling to claim that a lab leak must be a conspiracy. Lab leaks of dangerous viruses happen virtually every year.1 The SARS virus, responsible for the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome which emerged from Chinese bats in 2003 leaked from two laboratories in China, and the 1977 H1N1 influenza virus that caused about 700,000 deaths was also a lab escape from China.

Obviously, if the SARS-CoV-2 virus had escaped from research Daszak funded, he would be potentially culpable. He urged colleagues involved in gain-of-function research not to sign the letter, in order to obscure the connection, telling one of them: “We’ll then put it out in a way that doesn’t link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice.”

After 1.5 years with Daszak’s bullying, lies and arrogance,1 people had finally had enough. In September 2021, a group of scientists, the Paris Group, called for his removal in a letter they sent to the NIH and the Department of Health and Human Services because he had “withheld critical information and misled public opinion by expressing falsehoods.”11 They cited a tweet where Daszak claimed the Chinese labs he worked with had never kept live bats, even though by the Wuhan scientists’ own accounts, live bats were present at the facility since at least 2009.

Conclusions

COVID-19 is the pandemic that should never have occurred. It is deeply concerning that the WHO and our governments have not yet called for a ban on this highly dangerous playing with fire research that hasn’t led to anything of use but to the death of over 7 million people.

Science is about probabilities. When I consider the odds for the various possible explanations, I have no doubt that the pandemic was caused by a lab leak in Wuhan and that the virus was manufactured there.

The cover up of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is the worst in medical history. This will stand as a pillar of shame in the coming centuries.

References

  1. Gøtzsche PC. The Chinese virus: Killed millions and scientific freedom. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom; 2022. Freely available. 6
  2. Gøtzsche PC. Made in China: the coronavirus that killed millions of people. Ind J Med Ethics 2022;7:254-5.
  3. Shellenberger M, Taibbi M, Gutentag A. First people sickened by COVID-19 were Chinese scientists at Wuhan Institute Of Virology, say US Government sources. Public Substack 2023; June 13.
  4. Calvert J, Arbuthnott G. What really went on inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid erupted. The Times 2023; June 10.
  5. Gutentag A, Woodhouse L, Shellenberger M, Taibbi M. Top scientists misled congress about covid origins, newly released emails and messages show. Public Substack 2023; July 18.
  6. Andersen KG, Rambaut A, Lipkin WI, Holmes EC, Garry RF. The proximal origin of SARS-CoV2. Nat Med 2020;26:450-2.
  7. van Helden J, Butler CD, Canard B, et al. An appeal for an open scientific debate about the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. ResearchGate 2021; Jan.
  8. Wade N. Origin of Covid – following the clues: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box at Wuhan? Medium 2021; May 3.
  9. Taibbi M, Gutentag A, Schellenberger M. Fauci diverted US Government away from lab leak theory of COVID’s origin, sources say. Public Substack 2023; Sept 27.
  10. Calisher C, Carroll D, Colwell R, et al. Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19. Lancet 2020;395:e42-3.
  11. Schmidt C. Scientists square off over COVID, Wuhan, and Peter Daszak. Undark 2021; Nov 24.

For more: