Stealth Viruses

[Guest guest]

> Here is another theory on chronic Lyme. Don't know what to think

> about it. If people with the disease improve when they take

> antibiotics, doesn't it mean that it can't be solely viral?

>

> _________________________________________________________

>

> Hi there;

I posted on this topic a few weeks back on this board. You may want

to check it out. I also received a phone call based on my response

to a letter that Dr. sent to mmi.

I would recommend that you trust your insticts, as they seem to be

telling you something.

If you go to the website, you might find some interesting things;

1) this is not peer reviewed research; it's an internet abstract

2) the lab work done on these patient did not include Lyme, nor any

further workup for other possible causes

You might also be interested to know that several individuals with

Lyme were required to come off antibiotics under his guidence. It

was not recommended that they go back on, even when they

1) had NO improvement on his recommended antiviral therapy

2) had repeated positive lyme tests, including PCR

I leave your deductions up to you.

Hope this is helpful for you.

Sincerely,

Regina

[Guest guest]

Regina,

I didn`t know this about s protocal. Does he really make you

stop taking antibiotics if you have Lyme, even if his treatment does

not work,, geeezzzzz. I thought he was one of the good guys:(

> > Here is another theory on chronic Lyme. Don't know what to think

> > about it. If people with the disease improve when they take

> > antibiotics, doesn't it mean that it can't be solely viral?

> >

> > _________________________________________________________

> >

> > Hi there;

>

> I posted on this topic a few weeks back on this board. You may

want

> to check it out. I also received a phone call based on my response

> to a letter that Dr. sent to mmi.

>

> I would recommend that you trust your insticts, as they seem to be

> telling you something.

>

> If you go to the website, you might find some interesting things;

> 1) this is not peer reviewed research; it's an internet abstract

> 2) the lab work done on these patient did not include Lyme, nor any

> further workup for other possible causes

>

> You might also be interested to know that several individuals with

> Lyme were required to come off antibiotics under his guidence. It

> was not recommended that they go back on, even when they

> 1) had NO improvement on his recommended antiviral therapy

> 2) had repeated positive lyme tests, including PCR

>

> I leave your deductions up to you.

>

> Hope this is helpful for you.

> Sincerely,

> Regina

[Guest guest]

My opinion and my opinion only: martin is a man with a mission ie

proving that stealth viruses cause all ills and he will not look sideways at

anything that contradict his theory. A bit sad and dangerous for people with

late stage, severe chronic BACTERIAL (and treatable) infections.

Nelly

[ ] Re: Stealth viruses

>

> > Here is another theory on chronic Lyme. Don't know what to think

> > about it. If people with the disease improve when they take

> > antibiotics, doesn't it mean that it can't be solely viral?

> >

> > _________________________________________________________

> >

> > Hi there;

>

> I posted on this topic a few weeks back on this board. You may want

> to check it out. I also received a phone call based on my response

> to a letter that Dr. sent to mmi.

>

> I would recommend that you trust your insticts, as they seem to be

> telling you something.

>

> If you go to the website, you might find some interesting things;

> 1) this is not peer reviewed research; it's an internet abstract

> 2) the lab work done on these patient did not include Lyme, nor any

> further workup for other possible causes

>

> You might also be interested to know that several individuals with

> Lyme were required to come off antibiotics under his guidence. It

> was not recommended that they go back on, even when they

> 1) had NO improvement on his recommended antiviral therapy

> 2) had repeated positive lyme tests, including PCR

>

> I leave your deductions up to you.

>

> Hope this is helpful for you.

> Sincerely,

> Regina

>

>

>

> Welcome to

>

> Easy Reference:

> Send a blank email message to:

>

> -Unsubscribe - Unsubscribe from the list

> -Digest - Switch your subscription to a digest

format

> -Normal - Switch your subscription to normal

>

> Please send messages not related to Lyme disease (this includes humor and

information about other diseases) to -Offtopic

>

> The archives can be accessed at

>

> The chat room is always open!

> /chat

>

>

[Guest guest]

What is the website for this Dr. ? I must have missed it.

FrancineRNnJ

[Guest guest]

Dear Sammi,

Back when I posted, another person relayed thier story. It was one

of several people who contacted me to convey this experience. I did

not know this when I wrote the letter, but found out afterwards.

BTW: I hope you find this board as interesting and helpful as I

have. Welcome.

Sincerely,

Regina

> > > Here is another theory on chronic Lyme. Don't know what to

think

> > > about it. If people with the disease improve when they take

> > > antibiotics, doesn't it mean that it can't be solely viral?

> > >

> > > _________________________________________________________

> > >

> > > Hi there;

> >

> > I posted on this topic a few weeks back on this board. You may

> want

> > to check it out. I also received a phone call based on my

response

> > to a letter that Dr. sent to mmi.

> >

> > I would recommend that you trust your insticts, as they seem to

be

> > telling you something.

> >

> > If you go to the website, you might find some interesting things;

> > 1) this is not peer reviewed research; it's an internet abstract

> > 2) the lab work done on these patient did not include Lyme, nor

any

> > further workup for other possible causes

> >

> > You might also be interested to know that several individuals

with

> > Lyme were required to come off antibiotics under his guidence.

It

> > was not recommended that they go back on, even when they

> > 1) had NO improvement on his recommended antiviral therapy

> > 2) had repeated positive lyme tests, including PCR

> >

> > I leave your deductions up to you.

> >

> > Hope this is helpful for you.

> > Sincerely,

> > Regina

[Guest guest]

overman74@... wrote:

Here is another theory on chronic Lyme. Don't know what to think

about it. If people with the disease improve when they take

antibiotics, doesn't it mean that it can't be solely viral?

Hi All,

Below are some preliminary comments on this paper.

I hope there is a good discussion of it.

Jack

_________________________________________________________

The Center for Complex Infectious Diseases (CCID) wrote:

Are Stealth Virus Infections Misdiagnosed As Chronic

Lyme Disease?

ABSTRACT

This article reviews the basis for believing that stealth

virus infected patients are being inadvertently diagnosed

as having chronic Lyme disease.

C O M M E N T:

The nature of this article is far from clear: Is it a

research article? If so, where is the data? Is it a

review article? If so, why are there no superscripts and

references to which they would point?

CCID wrote:

With only a few exceptions, blood samples from patients

being treated for chronic Lyme disease have tested positive

in an assay designed to detect stealth-adapted cytopathic

viruses.

C O M M E N T:

With only a few exceptions, blood samples from patients

being treated for chronic Lyme disease have tested positive

for Epstein - Barr virus. Many chronic Lyme patients would

also probably test positive for human herpes virus number 6.

Both of these viruses can make people sick; but their presence

does not mean that the Lyme spirochete is absent.

CCID wrote:

It is known that a stealth virus has assimilated bacterial

sequences, some of which are related to genes of Borrelia

burgdorferi, the causative agent of classical acute Lyme

disease. The presence of bacteria - derived sequences,

rather than actual Borrelia bacteria, may account for the

positive serological and molecular based assays that are

often, but not always, seen in patients labeled as having

chronic Lyme disease.

C O M M E N T:

Where did the stealth viruses pick up the Lyme bacterial

sequences? Did they have them before they invaded the

person diagnosed with chronic Lyme? IS THERE ANY DATA?

CCID wrote:

.... If the hypothesis of this paper is correct, then many

patients currently being classified as having chronic

Lyme disease, may respond to therapies being developed

for stealth virus infections.

C O M M E N T:

Many chronic Lyme patients would probably respond to

therapies which attack a variety of parasites: bacteria such

as Erlichia and streptococcus, protazoans such as Babesia, and,

of course, a host of viruses. That's why LLMDs emphasize

general immune system improvement.

CCID wrote:

LYME DISEASE DIAGNOSIS

Laboratory support for a clinical diagnosis of chronic

Lyme disease is currently provided by positive results in

various antigen, antibody and/or molecular based assays

for Borrelia burgdorferi.

Inter-laboratory variability ...

C O M M E N T:

The defects of ELISA and Western Blot are well known.

CCID's proposal that these tests are picking up antibodies

generated by Lyme sequences possessed by stealth viruses

is plausible. Any observed Ig band probably can be

produced by a variety of antigens, some having nothing

to do with Lyme.

THE ONLY TYPE OF TEST VALID FOR LYME IS A TEST IN WHICH

THE Bb SPRIOCHETE IS VISUALIZED, EITHER BY STAINING,

OR BY DELINEATION BY FLOURESCING ANTIBODIES ( Lab,

Bowen Lab), OR BY SOME OTHER MEANS OF VISUALIZATION.

Other direct tests for Lyme antigens, such as those

recently (4-16-01) announced by Igenex, would be good

tests for confirmation.

CCID wrote:

.... Relevant to the present discussion, several CFS patients

from non- Lyme disease endemic regions, such as Los

Angeles, are showing positive serological test for

Borrelia ...

C O M M E N T:

How does CCID know that Los Angeles

is a " non- Lyme disease endemic region " ? Please

give us the data from a large scale Bowen - type

testing program that shows that the majority of people

in Los Angeles (or anywhere else in the United States)

are NOT infected with Lyme.

Six members of my family have been given the Bowen test,

some several times. Only two have been incapacitated

and clinically diagnosed with Lyme (thankfully restored

to productive living with antibiotics). The other four

of us are not sick in any conventional sense of the word,

and we would not have sought treatment for Lyme except

for a twist of fate. THE EXTENT OF THE LYME EPIDEMIC IN

THE UNITED STATES IS UNKNOWN!

CCID wrote:

.... An obvious question is whether stealth virus infections

could be misdiagnosed as chronic Lyme disease ...

C O M M E N T:

Another obvious question is whether or not chronic Lyme

disease could be misdiagnosed as a stealth virus infection,

as chronic fatigue syndrome or MS (which is like being told

that one is sick with a broken leg), or some other disease

(which can only be treated with cheap, palliative measures).

CCID wrote:

In approaching this problem, CCID has been successful in

demonstrating positive stealth virus cultures in blood

samples from over 90% of patients referred with a diagnosis

of chronic Lyme disease.

C O M M E N T:

It is probable that CCID would be successful in

demonstrating positive Epstein - Barr virus cultures in blood

samples from over 90% of patients referred with a diagnosis

of chronic Lyme disease. Where is the proof that the

Lyme spirochete is absent?

CCID wrote:

.... By simply co-culturing stealth viruses and Borrelia

burgdorferi, one can observe a marked enhancement in

the intracellular growth of the Borrelia (personal

observation). To one extent, this could suggest that an

underlying stealth virus infection could create an in vivo

environment of Borrelia growth promoting cells.

C O M M E N T:

Does this mean that the Lyme spirochete must be present

in the patient before the stealth virus can pick it up?

Is this a variation on the theme that there is no Bb

in chronic Lyme patients, only antibodies to Lyme?

It's fascinating to observe the lengths to which some

will go to try to prove that people with the symptoms

of Lyme disease do not have Lyme disease (e. g. the

autoimmune disease disinformation campaign).

[Guest guest]

>

> Here is another theory on chronic Lyme. Don't know what to think

> about it. If people with the disease improve when they take

> antibiotics, doesn't it mean that it can't be solely viral?

>

> Hi All,

>

> Below are some preliminary comments on this paper.

> I hope there is a good discussion of it.

>

> Jack

>

> _________________________________________________________

> Is this a variation on the theme that there is no Bb

> in chronic Lyme patients, only antibodies to Lyme?

> It's fascinating to observe the lengths to which some

> will go to try to prove that people with the symptoms

> of Lyme disease do not have Lyme disease (e. g. the

> autoimmune disease disinformation campaign).

Hi and all;

This was the letter I wrote in response to Dr. 's post on mmi.

He responded on mme, so I wrote a second letter, as he was not any

more clear in his second email.

He then emailed me privately, and contacted me by phone. I spent an

hour and a half on the phone addressing my concerns. While some of

his wet bench chemistry is very good and interesting in HIS area of

virology, I did not feel he was able to address the issues I put

forth, nor did his motivation become any clearer.

Sincerely,

Regina

Dear Dr. ,

I have read your interesting letter regarding stealth virus, and had

been introduced to the idea well over 2 years ago. Your credentials

speak to your knowledge in virology, and I do believe that stealth

virus exists.

It is my understanding (from your website, and by at least one

physician who is a proponent of your work) that stealth virus can be

derived from the routine vaccinations one would receive as a child, a

standardized practice in this country. An infected blood supply could

also be a contributing factor, along with other modes of

transmission, including mutation of known viruses.

That being the case, why then, would not all or most individuals come

up as positive in your assays for stealth virus? Further, it would

seem to me that a much greater percentage of the population would be

seeking treatment for chronic illness such as LD, CFS, Alzheimer's or

similar disorders if this were the so.

Regarding your work on stealth virus, have there been further

improvements in the reporting aspect? More specifically, have you

been able to quantify the results in reporting? As of approximately

2 years ago, the report of " positive for stealth virus " was simply

not enough for most of my former colleagues to accept as evidence,

and I was repeatedly confronted with the same comments, which

questioned the lack of quantitative data in reporting. I have read

your site, (in the FAQS, and Q and A section) and was curious if you

have made any progress in the reporting aspect, i.e., titers, etc.

Due to your description of these entities, I would imagine that would

be very difficult to do; yet thought I would ask. It would be helpful

for me to know this, and if this is the case, I would be most

appreciative if you could direct me to any publications or

information of this nature.

In you Internet paper, you state that 90% of the patients diagnosed

with Lyme Disease whose specimens were sent to you were positive for

stealth virus. You also state that 15% of healthy volunteers were

positive as well. I could not find any number as to the total

participants in each group, nor how the sampling was derived. I did

see that Dr. Burrascano had contacted you, so I am assuming that some

of these samples were patients of his. For the healthy population,

was there any other work done to rule out other illness from the 15%

that were also positive? If so, could you please provide this

information? I would be interested in knowing more information on

healthy population in your study. There is no mention of these

points, and I cannot locate an actual publication, or I would not ask

for this.

You knowledge of testing for Lyme disease seems comprehensive by

inference, and not merely semantic in nature. I would be greatly

interested any work you have done specifically on the various

laboratory's methods, or if more appropriate, your resources for this

data. I did find it a little curious, and perhaps I am

misunderstanding, but I am reading your letter as stating that all

the current serologic tests for Lyme Disease are flawed; yet, you

seem to be validating that statement by using the negative results of

the newer ELISA to substantiate this. I am perplexed, as this seems

to be somewhat of a contradiction.

I am certain that anyone involved with Lyme Disease is very aware of

the inconclusive nature of laboratory findings. This is one of the

many reasons why so many physicians and individuals have been

attempting to resolve the conflicts that prevent further

investigation of the illness, diagnosis and treatment. As I am

certain you are aware, without responsible research, these issues

cannot be resolved.

I do know that viruses cause significant neurological dysfunction,

and therefore agree with your position in this regard. My mentor had

this belief as well, and I was fortunate to have spent 15 years

working with such an open-minded neurochemist, who is also a

certified neuropharmacologist and a neuropsychologist in license.

Has served on the board for the Learning Disabilities Association for

many years, to cite one of his many areas of expertise.

I do not understand some of the conclusions you have made based on

your data. Your findings of a 90% stealth virus positive rate in

those samples from Lyme Disease patients does not preclude the

probability of a co-infection. In your abstract you state: " The

lipid-laden cells infected with a stealth virus appear especially

favorable to the growth of intracellular bacteria, including Borrelia

burgdorferi, the agent of Lyme disease. This is in keeping with the

consistent finding of positive stealth viral cultures in patients

diagnosed with chronic Lyme disease. " You then further state " By

simply co-culturing stealth viruses and Borrelia burgdorferi, one can

observe a marked enhancement in the intracellular growth of the

Borrelia (personal observation). To one extent, this could suggest

that an underlying stealth virus infection could create an in vivo

environment of Borrelia growth promoting cells. "

It would appear to me that you might not have truly considered the

possibility of a simultaneous infection, or further, the possibility

that the Borrelia itself was the source of (infected by) the stealth

virus. If so, you would be thereby adding to the numerous

publications already in existence as to the persistent nature of

these organisms, and the numerous factors that contribute to chronic

morbidity in Lyme Disease. The title of your abstract, the many

statement in your abstract and finally your letter have led me to

assume that your position is that Lyme Disease doesn't truly cause

this degree of morbidity, so in at least 90% of the cases (if that

representation held true) stealth virus is the cause. In wondering

if this might be your suggestion, I also checked your website, and

found 3 case reports of patients with very significant illness. In

all 3 patients, routine laboratory tests were done which excluded any

workup for Lyme Disease (as cited in the case 2 description of the

lab work done) and it would have been prudent for at least 2 of the

cases. In fact, with the presentations of at least 1 of the cases, I

wondered why there was no differential diagnosis for other causative

factors; including Lyme Disease, genetic disorder metabolic in nature

(metachromatic leukodystrophy, multiple sulfatase deficiency, etc.),

or a myriad of other known illnesses that have known causation and

etiology (albeit difficult to determine with some.). It would appear

(in your own words) that since none of these patients responded to

the currently available treatments for stealth virus, it may be

helpful to for these patient to explore other possibilities.

Finally, I would believe that stealth virus does exert consequences

on the immune system, and that these affected individuals may go on

to developing states of chronic illness when exposed to further

pathogens. I would also believe that in the absence of other causes,

stealth alone could do tremendous damage, causing significant

morbidity and mortality.

I cannot draw the conclusions, however; that it is predominantly

stealth alone causing so many illnesses, even to the exclusion of

documented and known causative agents (such as Bb), regardless of the

absence of a singular method for appropriate serologic evaluation. I

do not understand how you have concluded this, despite the many

publications describing the microbiology of the persistence of

Borrelia, and contributing factors in Chronic Lyme Disease.

It is possible that I am misunderstanding your position in this

matter, and I would encourage you to clarify this for me if you have

the opportunity. I have provided my email address below for further

correspondence.

I hope you have the opportunity to pursue your work, as I do believe

it is very valuable and important.

Sincerely,

Regina

Neurochem1@...

[Guest guest]

Dottie,

There are thousands and thousands of steath viruses, steath

mycoplasmas, stealth you-name-its developed by the military for " defensive "

purposes. Sometimes they do find their way into the general population,

but usually they find their way to underappreciated populations. This is

just the world in which we live and there is very little that can be done

about it. BTW, many countries have been doing this and often in

collusion. You don't hear much about it because it doesn't make for

comfortable dinner conversation.

At 10:00 AM 04/04/05, you wrote:

>Dear Steve:

>If you type in " Stealth Virus " in a search you will find that information,

>as well as its relationship to EB virus.

>In 2002, I accompanied my sister to her oncologist. I asked if he would

>take some blood for a stealth virus test and he came up about three foot

>off his chair and recited all his credentials to us, ending with if there

>was such a thing, he would know about it.

>Dottie

[Guest guest]

http://www.ccid.org/index.htm

http://www.ccid.org/about.htm