Submitted by Jim K on Fri, 2006-05-19 19:30

This study does a nice job of demonstrating that standard antibiotic treatment with accepted antichlamydials does not get rid of persistent Chlamydia pneumoniae in cells. Note the date. It's been around for a while, and yet "modern" researchers in cardiovascular disease "persist" in treating with 14-30 days of zith and pronouncing with medical authority that antibiotics have not effect on Cpn induced cardiovascular events. Duh! There's still infection. Note too, it's from our old friend Hammerschlag who also has argued strenously against Cpn in MS and Alzheimer's. Win one, loose one.Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002 Feb;46(2):409-12.Related Articles,  Links   Effect of prolonged treatment with azithromycin, clarithromycin, or levofloxacin on Chlamydia pneumoniae in a continuous-infection Model.Kutlin A, Roblin PM, Hammerschlag MR.Department of Pediatrics, State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York 11203-2098, USA.Persistent infections with Chlamydia pneumoniae have been implicated in the development of chronic diseases, such as atherosclerosis and asthma. Although azithromycin, clarithromycin, and levofloxacin are frequently used for the treatment of respiratory C. pneumoniae infections, little is known about the dose and duration of therapy needed to treat a putative chronic C. pneumoniae infection. In this study, we investigated the effect of prolonged treatment with azithromycin, clarithromycin, or levofloxacin on the viability of C. pneumoniae and cytokine production in an in vitro model of continuous infection. We found that a 30-day treatment with azithromycin, clarithromycin, and levofloxacin at concentrations comparable to those achieved in the pulmonary epithelial lining fluid reduced but did not eliminate C. pneumoniae in continuously infected HEp-2 cells. All three antibiotics decreased levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and IL-8 in HEp-2 cells, but this effect appeared to be secondary to the antichlamydial activity, as the cytokine levels correlated with the concentrations of microorganisms. The levels of IL-1beta, IL-4, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and gamma interferon were too low to assess the effect of antibiotics. These data suggest that the dosage and duration of antibiotic therapy currently being used may not be sufficient to eradicate a putative chronic C. pneumoniae infection.

Could she be learning...walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...it's a duck?  Or will she do another study to study her study at the end of which she will conclude that there is insufficient evidence to concur with herself?  Forgive me, please, but I followed her studies and amusing conclusions before I ever discovered this website.  At that time, I wasn't biased..I just thought "What does it take for a researcher to own up to the evidence of the research work, even confirmatory findings?"  I guess her rubber restraints are stretching a bit.     CyprianeMS caregiver and care advocate - Dallas, Texas, USA

Joyce~caregiver-advocate in Dallas for Steve J (SPMS).  CAP since August 06, Cpn, Mpn, B. burgdorferi, systemic candidiasis, EBV, CMV & other herpes family viral infections, elevated heavy metals, gluten+casein sensitivity. 

That's from 2002, but their learning is still ongoing.........Sarah An Itinerary in Light and Shadow  Berger.  Started the Wheldon regime in August 2003, due to very aggressive SPMS.  Moved to intermittent therapy after one year.  In May 2006 still take this, two weeks every two months.  EDSS was about 7, now less than 2. 

Completed Stratton/Wheldon regime for aggressive secondary progressive MS in June 2007, after four years, three of which intermittent.   Still improving bit by bit and no relapses since finishing treatment.

Fab paper I have referenced it but it is not in the research pages so in it goes! I can't resist chiming in: Cypriane you noticed her endless academic and pointless arguments also? Funy isn't it? I like the one that says that we can't test for persistent infection so therefore cannot ever know if antibiotics helped in a given chronic illness possibly CPn related since we can't retest. found here
Gee, is there such a thing as clinical observation? This is the gutting of the medical mind to suggest that one dare not think or observe for themselves, only lab data can be considered valuable. Or maybe we ought to just give up altogether.
marie

On CAP since Sept '05 for MS, RA, Asthma, sciatica edss at start 5.5.
"Color out side the lines!"

On CAP since Sept '05 for MS, RA, Asthma, sciatica. EDSS at start 5.5.(early cane) Now 6 (cane full time) Originally on: Doxy 200, Azith 3x week, Tini cont. over summer '07, Revamp of protocol in Summer '08 by Stratton due to functional loss; clarithro

Marie, clinical observation takes time and attention, every one wants quick easily manipulated data these days, not observations.   In my attempts to get to the bottom of Cpn, the only tool I have is observation, not being a medical person, and it has helped me spot patterns and reactions.   Observation and this site, have given me some understanding of what is going on.This reflects the medical research trend towards NEW solutions to problems, not much glory in revisiting stuff other people discovered decades ago.   Michele:  on Wheldon protocol since 1st May 2006 from Sussex, UK

Michèle (UK) GFA: Wheldon CAP 1st May 2006. Daily Doxy, Azi MWF, metro pulse.

It's a standard science wisecrack that biologists defer to chemists, chemists defer to physicists, physicists to  mathematicians, and mathematicians only to God. However, although speculation and observation are a respected part of physics (quoting Osler's Web, here), they are held in strong suspicion in medicine. So, in physics, observation itself is considered data, but not in medicine (at this time; another of those fashions David Wheldon mentions). In physics, speculating what the data means is laudable; in medicine, it's considered "unscientific."Odd that there'd be such respect for the results of physics and such disrespect for the methods.RonOn Stratton protocol for CFS starting 01/06 (NE Ohio, USA).

RonOn CAP for CFS starting 01/06 (NE Ohio, USA)Began rifampin trial 1/14/09Currently: on intermittent

D W

Ron, Slightly off-topic, but perhaps not quite. In medicine at the moment there's a craze for 'meta-analysis' where good, bad and ugly data-sets are all mixed together, witches-on-the-blasted-heath style, and the resulting mess is poured into a kind of Babbage-engine. What happens? The good, careful, thoughtfully prospective work is obliterated in a jumble of noise. On looking at some of these meta-analyses I wonder if they were done just to satisfy some need for publication. (It gets worse; in the General Medical Council newsletter last month someone suggested that the GMC should police medical practice via the desiderations of a consortium of meta-analysts known as NICE [National Institute for Clinical Excellence]. If that happens it's time to head for the hills.)I need a laugh this Sunday morning. Writing the above paragraph brought back to my mind the classes in Statistics which I attended as a student; they were held in a Victorian pile in Whiteladies Road, Bristol, which was called 'Canynge Hall' (but referred to by the students as 'Carnage Hall'.) Each place was equipped with an ancient electro-mechanical calculator about the size of a small office typewriter (they were called 'Facit' calculators, but were referred to by the students as 'Fake-its'. They had a reverberant cast-iron chassis and were very noisy, and the more complex their task the noisier they seemed to get.) The teaching was as dull as ditch-water, and, I'm afraid, towards the end of the afternoon we would begin to play up. Very childish, I know. One of the regular ways of doing this was to set the Fake-it on an unachievable task. Other students would catch on, and soon the room would be roaring with these unintelligent cogs and shafts attempting to work out the square root of 10 or some such problem; the air would be filled with that kind of sparky electrical smell and blue fumes, not all of which came from the Fake-its.Data-sets don't have to be vast. Take that small but fastidious trial of antibiotics in MS at Vanderbilt. It's a pleasure to read the methodology and to see that it was prospective and double-blind. And antibiotics did bring down the rate of brain volume loss to that found in the general population. And to show that they needed very sophisticated software.

D W - [Myalgia and hypertension (typically 155/95.) Began (2003) taking doxycycline and macrolide and later adding metronidazole. No medication now. Morning BP typically 110/75]

 More Bad Fashion SenseDavid- Your description of NICE initially engedered laughter at the James Bond-ish acronym, or is that George Bush-ish acronym, ie, an evil controlling secret agency with some sweet-as-sugar initials. Really? This is a real name? But it's sinister overtones then engendered paranoia. We have this fashion for meta-studies also in psychology, excepting most psychologists have enough research training to know how much bull---t is involved in such work and take it with a more jaundiced eye. I've noticed that most doctors in the US, unless they are researchers themselves, actually know nothing about research methods and statistics other than what they are told (eg that double blind is best, etc), and have little capacity to critique the studies they read.A worse fashion in my mind, with a voluble bunch behind it in psychology, is "evidence based treatment" (EBT). By this they mean that if a treatment in medicine or psychology does not have scientific studies that prove it's effective (never mind how that is defined) you can't use it-- or insurance won't reimburse for it. Now, we all know that what accumulates evidence is based on a whole bunch of factors such as where research money is, what the current academic fashion is, etc. What gets studied is not based on what's necessarily best, but this gets converted by EBT into "best practice" quite readily. And that's not NICE. In medicine this means that the it doesn't matter what the clinician knows about their patient, or has discovered about their treatment response, or is putting together based on clinical observation and guesswork, if the treatment isn't the "proven and accepted" one for that diagnosis it would be considered wrong. In psychology it's even worse, since the only therapies studied in US universities are those which are fashionable academically (cognitive behaviorism) and are easy to study (read have simplistic approaches which are easy to standardize for research purposes. All the subtlety of clinical evaluation and patient relationship, let alone experienced insight or less behavioristic approaches, are thrown out the window.I have to say this discussion-- another extension of your "Fashion in Medicine" discussion David, is much more interesting than the original post these comments are threaded from!On CAP's protocol for Cpn in CFS/FMS since December 2004.Currently: 150mg INH, Doxy/Zith, Tini pulses "I really didn't say everything I said." Yogi Berra

D W

NICE is indeed the acronym, Jim, of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. As you say, it has sinister overtones. (By a hilarious co-incidence there was an institute with the same acronym in one of C S Lewis's novels, That Hideous Strength. That NICE was, I believe, called the National Institute for Coordinated Experimentation, and was a diabolic creation. Given the identical acronyms one wonders if some sly humourist was at work.)A few links:GMCtoday. The proposal that NICE guidelines should be used by the GMC to police medical practice can be found on page 13 of the April edition (pdf) http://www.gmc-uk.org/publications/gmc_today/index.asp I wonder if they'll publish my reply?NICE headquarters. http://www.nice.org.uk/Carnage Hall. It used to be the Imperial Hotel. A lady called Madame Virtue, who kept a second-hand clothes shop in town, worked here. I love her name. http://www.epi.bris.ac.uk/images/canynge.jpgA Fake-it electromechanical calculator: http://www.vintagecalculators.com/FacitESA01_1.JPG 

D W - [Myalgia and hypertension (typically 155/95.) Began (2003) taking doxycycline and macrolide and later adding metronidazole. No medication now. Morning BP typically 110/75]

D W

NICE is indeed the acronym, Jim, of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. As you say, it has sinister overtones. (By a hilarious co-incidence there was an institute with the same acronym in one of C S Lewis's novels, That Hideous Strength. That NICE was, I believe, called the National Institute for Coordinated Experimentation, and was a diabolic creation. Given the identical acronyms one wonders if some sly humourist was at work.)A few links:GMCtoday. The proposal that NICE guidelines should be used by the GMC to police medical practice can be found on page 13 of the April edition (pdf) http://www.gmc-uk.org/publications/gmc_today/index.asp I wonder if they'll publish my reply?NICE headquarters. http://www.nice.org.uk/Carnage Hall. It used to be the Imperial Hotel. A lady called Madame Virtue, who kept a second-hand clothes shop in town, worked here. I love her name. http://www.epi.bris.ac.uk/images/canynge.jpgA Fake-it electromechanical calculator: http://www.vintagecalculators.com/FacitESA01_1.JPG 

D W - [Myalgia and hypertension (typically 155/95.) Began (2003) taking doxycycline and macrolide and later adding metronidazole. No medication now. Morning BP typically 110/75]

Sorry Jim! I did add it to the research pages and thus it appears twice in the right side bar. Oops! it is saved for posterity though
marie

On CAP since Sept '05 for MS, RA, Asthma, sciatica. EDSS at start 5.5.
"Color out side the lines!"

On CAP since Sept '05 for MS, RA, Asthma, sciatica. EDSS at start 5.5.(early cane) Now 6 (cane full time) Originally on: Doxy 200, Azith 3x week, Tini cont. over summer '07, Revamp of protocol in Summer '08 by Stratton due to functional loss; clarithro