Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The gold standard in microbiology for diagnosing an infectious disease has always been to culture the organism alive. Despite notorious difficulties in culturing Borrelia burgdorferi, in about 30 studies this organism has been cultured alive from patients despite at least standard antibiotic therapy, and in many cases after antibiotics far in excess of what is deemed curative by IDSA and CDC. If the pathogen that causes a disease is still present in conjunction with symptoms compatible with that infection, it would appear to me that the fundamental questions about the cause of long term symptoms should have been answered a very long time ago. To add insult to injury, recent studies from Tulane, Johns Hopkins, and Northeastern University all demonstrate that we can’t even kill Borrelia in the test tube with the currently recommended antibiotics. What are the chances that a second disease of mysterious etiology but with the same symptoms as the first disease, would come and replace the first disease when there is published evidence that the pathogen which causes the first disease persists despite both short and long-term antibiotics? There are numerous chronic bacterial infections which require long-term combination antibiotic therapies: Tuberculosis, leprosy, coxiella endcocarditis, brucellosis, Whipple’s. Why should Lyme be different?

>In 2016, Venkata Raveendra Pothineni and colleagues at Stanford reported on new drug candidates against Borrelia burgdorferi using a technique known as high-throughput screening. They ranked disulfiram as number one in activity against Bb among their top 20 hits. https://www.lymedisease.org/disulfiram-kinderlehrer/

>Dr. Kenneth Liegner has had the longest experience treating tick-borne infections with disulfiram. He is seeing sustained remissions of six months or more after completing treatment in many patients. Dr. Liegner’s first patient had been on triple antibiotic treatment for eight years for Lyme disease and babesiosis, and could not stop his treatment regimen without suffering a relapse. He took disulfiram for four months and has now been off all treatment for almost two and a half years, feeling better than ever. https://www.lymedisease.org/disulfiram-kinderlehrer-2/

Disulfiram is a gamechanger. People on reddit, on facebook and in the casestudy of Dokter Kenneth Liegner[0], people who were still sick after they were on antibiotics for years, are suddenly seeing amazing improvements after only a short time on Disulfiram.

Strange isn't it that an antimicrobial has such amazing results for a disease that supposedly is psychological or autoimmune...

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31151194




This should be the top comment.

I'm a bit disappointed in HN.

So many of the comments here are focused on doubting the victims and ridiculing them for their irrational beliefs.

The irony is that it's those very critics that aren't being rational.

They have the causality backwards and seem to be assuming that if antibiotics didn't eliminate the symptoms then that means the disease can't be real.

Wouldn't it be more rational to conclude that maybe the antibiotic isn't killing the pathogen?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: