Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeAuthor statement
Posted by membersla on 02 Mar 2012 at 15:19 GMT
We recently published this article entitled “Persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi in Rhesus Macaques Following Antibiotic Treatment of Disseminated Infection.” The subject and content of this work may be viewed very divergently, given the controversy surrounding Lyme disease treatment. Specifically, the phenomenon of post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome and its cause (s) have been viewed with much contention.
Our work, which was funded by several grants from the National Institutes of Health, is composed of two major experiments. Experiment 1 entailed a very comprehensive and time-consuming study that indicated the possibility that spirochetes could persist after antibiotic treatment, but only nucleic acid or antigen of these bacteria were detected, leaving open the question of persistence by intact organisms. Experiment 2 was intended to answer that question. The authors elected to publish these 2 studies together, as they mutually enhance the validity and scientific merit of the work.
In our study, we provide evidence demonstrating the post-treatment persistence of the B. burgdorferi spirochete that has been reported previously in a mouse model. We further demonstrate through multiple detection methods that intact spirochetes can survive antibiotic treatment in a nonhuman primate host. It is not our intent to present data in opposition of current antibiotic treatment regimens for humans, but rather to report what we believe to be objective, well-performed experiments on antibiotic efficacy in a nonhuman primate model.
These data are by no means a referendum on long-term antibiotic therapy, nor should they serve to oppose current IDSA guidelines for the treatment of Lyme disease. From the medical standpoint, these results may or may not warrant testing of additional treatments or regimens. This depends heavily on the results of further inquiry as to the duration of persistence, the viability and phenotype of persistent organisms, and the answer to the key question of whether persisters are pathogenic. Current practices could only be challenged by solid proof of better treatment options; these are currently not available.
For several decades, basic scientists and medical doctors have collaborated to understand and improve Lyme disease treatment, diagnosis and prevention. As we proceed with further inquiry into the phenomenon of PTLDS, these collaborations are essential. The continued discussion, commentary and debate will additionally be of benefit when conducted without bias.
RE: Author statement
burraj51 replied to membersla on 03 Mar 2012 at 17:33 GMT
Dr. Embers, why was there such a long delay in publishing this important work? Are you or the other authors currently undertaking extended or follow up studies?
RE: Persistent Borrelia past treatment (Mario Philipp)
KathleenDickson replied to membersla on 09 Mar 2012 at 10:07 GMT
We need to discover why OspA vaccination produced the same "multi-system" disease as chronic Lyme, as reported by Dennis Parenti (SmithKline) at the 1998 FDA Vaccine Meeting on LYMErix (OspA), and also reported by Dave Persing in his RICO patent (US #6, 045,804).
Mario Philipp reported that OspA exposure resulted in the immunosuppressive cytokine IL-10. Paul Duray (US Army, NCI) reported that the lymphocytes of chronic Lyme victims "resembled Epstein-Barr transformed cells."
It's a bit of a cowardly statement on the part of Philipp, clearly, to be standing in support of the IDSA "guidelines." He surely knows better.