I don't believe we have this linked to our Research Pages (Marie?). This is a brilliant dissertation from the Finnish group, some of the world's experts on Cpnⁱ as some of the faculty in Helsinki were part of the original group who discovered the very existence of Cpn.

This dissertation demonstrates a number of important findings:

• Repeated infection with Cpn "...induced persistent chlamydial DNA and inflammationⁱ in lung tissue and development of mouse Hsp60 autoantibodies."
• Repeated infection with Cpn "...significantly increased subendothelial lipid accumulation in the aortic sinus area."
• That "A flavonoid, luteolin, was shown to effectively decrease the chlamydial load and inflammatory reactions in lung tissue." Note: luteolin is not the same as lutein.
  
• Conventional antimicrobial treatments are not effectively to eradicate persistent infection.

Lääketieteellinen tiedekunta, Oulun yliopisto

Here is a link to a detailed and technical paper on PCRⁱ analysis that evaluates and outlines the problem with culturing CPn and the variations in abilities in different labs. It also talks about the results of split samples and concordance between some PCR approaches and discordance with others. Though this is highly technical, it answers the question of how can it be that there are still some researchers producing papers saying, for example, that they tested patients with MSⁱ for CPn and found the incidence to be no higher than controls, such as this article here but note that this one used antibody tests, a ridiculously ineffective way of looking for CPn in cryptic form in the brain.