Doctor A said I can’t have a systemic infection because we would have seen it in the blood work, C reactive protein, CBC, etc. However, Doctor B says not all pathogens trigger inflammation, some hide from the immune system and do not cause inflammation, although they do cause damage in the body. Who is more right?
Doctor A’s Perspective:
Doctor A suggests that systemic infections would typically be detected through blood work, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) tests and complete blood count (CBC). CRP is a marker of inflammation, which is often elevated in cases of infection, as the liver releases more CRP into the bloodstream when inflammation occurs[1][2][5]. Similarly, a CBC can indicate infection through elevated white blood cell counts, which are part of the body’s immune response to pathogens[3].
Doctor B’s Perspective:
Doctor B points out that not all pathogens trigger inflammation detectable by these tests. Some pathogens may evade the immune system or cause damage without significant inflammation. This is a valid consideration, as certain infections might not lead to elevated CRP levels or noticeable changes in a CBC. For example, some viral infections may not cause a significant CRP response, and certain pathogens can hide from the immune system, avoiding detection by standard inflammatory markers[4].
Pathogens that Evade Detection with CRP and CBC
In conclusion, while Doctor A’s reliance on CRP and CBC is standard practice for detecting systemic infections, Doctor B’s caution about pathogens that might not trigger typical inflammatory responses is also valid. It highlights the complexity of diagnosing infections and the limitations of relying solely on these tests.
Stealth Infections, Virus
Some pathogens can evade detection using standard tests like C-reactive protein (CRP) and complete blood count (CBC). Here are some insights from the search results:
1. Viral Infections: CRP is generally associated with bacterial infections, but it can also be elevated in viral infections such as influenza, adenovirus, and SARS-CoV-2. However, CRP alone cannot differentiate between bacterial and viral infections, which means some viral infections might not trigger a significant CRP response[12][13][14].
2. Latent or Chronic Infections: Certain infections may not cause acute inflammation detectable by CRP or CBC. For example, some viral infections like Epstein-Barr virus or cytomegalovirus might not lead to elevated CRP levels, particularly if they are latent or chronic[12].
3. Immune Evasion: Some pathogens have mechanisms to evade the immune system, which might prevent the typical inflammatory response that would be detected by CRP or CBC. This can include pathogens that hide within cells or manipulate the host’s immune response to avoid detection[13].
Overall, while CRP and CBC are useful tools for detecting many infections, they have limitations, particularly for certain viral infections and pathogens that can evade immune detection.
Stealth Infections, Bacteria
Certain bacteria have developed mechanisms to evade detection by standard tests like C-reactive protein (CRP) and complete blood count (CBC). Here are some specific examples:
1. Spirochetes: These bacteria, such as those causing Lyme disease, can evade the host’s immune system, resulting in lower CRP levels during infection. The host’s immune response may rely more on mechanisms other than inflammation, making it difficult to detect using CRP and CBC[6].
2. Haemophilus influenzae: This bacterium can undergo phase variation in the expression of phosphorylcholine (PCh) on its lipopolysaccharides (LPS), which allows it to evade CRP-mediated immune responses. By varying PCh expression, it can avoid detection and attack by CRP[10].
3. Neisseria spp.: Similar to Haemophilus influenzae, Neisseria species can also undergo phase variation in PCh expression on their LPS, helping them evade CRP detection and immune response[10].
4. Pneumococci (Streptococcus pneumoniae): Although CRP can bind to pneumococcal cell wall components, the presence of a capsule can prevent CRP from accessing these components, allowing the bacteria to evade immune detection and response[7].
5. Anaplasma and Ehrlichia are indeed bacteria, specifically intracellular bacteria that can cause tick-borne illnesses known as anaplasmosis and ehrlichiosis, respectively. These infections often present with symptoms such as headache, muscle pain, and fatigue, but they typically do not provoke significant inflammation detectable in standard tests. Initial symptoms may include leukopenia (a decrease in white blood cells) and thrombocytopenia (a decrease in platelets), which can later progress to leukocytosis (an increase in white blood cells) and elevated liver enzymes. These changes might be missed in routine screenings, making diagnosis challenging. The primary method for diagnosing these infections is through polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing or serological tests, which can detect the bacteria’s DNA or the presence of antibodies, respectively[30][31][32].
6. Bartonella: Bartonella species are gram-negative, facultative intracellular bacteria that can survive within host cells, making them difficult to detect and evade the immune system. These bacteria have developed various mechanisms, such as altering surface proteins and producing biofilms, to avoid immune recognition and clearance. As a result, diagnosing Bartonella infections can be challenging, often requiring specialized tests like serology or PCR, which may still yield false negatives. Bartonella infections can lead to neuropsychiatric symptoms and other systemic issues, complicating diagnosis and treatment.
These examples illustrate how some bacteria can avoid triggering significant inflammatory responses detectable by CRP and CBC, thereby complicating diagnosis using these standard tests.
Stealth Infections, Other
Babesia: This parasite infects red blood cells and can mimic malaria. It often evades detection because it does not always cause significant inflammation detectable in standard blood tests. Diagnosis typically requires specialized tests like PCR or antibody tests, as it can be asymptomatic or present with non-specific symptoms like fatigue and fever.
All of these stealth infections are adept at evading the immune system, often residing within cells or using other mechanisms to avoid detection, making them challenging to diagnose and treat effectively[2][3].
Planned Institutional Non-Detection
The Lyme Lawsuit
A federal antitrust lawsuit was filed by 28 plaintiffs, including lead plaintiff Lisa Torrey, against several major health insurers and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), accusing them of conspiring to deny proper treatment for Lyme disease. The lawsuit alleges that the insurers, including Kaiser Permanente, engaged in a conspiracy to establish guidelines that limited Lyme disease treatment to a 28-day course of antibiotics, despite evidence that this was insufficient for many patients. The plaintiffs argue that this led to many patients being untreated and suffering from chronic Lyme disease symptoms, which they claim require longer antibiotic treatment. The lawsuit seeks treble damages under the RICO Act and Sherman Act for alleged racketeering and antitrust violations[25][26].
Kaiser Permanente, one of the defendants, settled in the lawsuit, although details of the settlement were not specified[26]. The lawsuit also involved accusations against the IDSA and several doctors, claiming they engaged in a conspiracy with the insurers. However, a judge dismissed the lawsuit against the IDSA and the doctors, stating that the claims were not supported by scientific evidence. The IDSA guidelines were defended as being based on a careful review of scientific studies, and adherence to them was described as voluntary[28].
Similar Symptoms to Lyme
Lyme disease, primarily caused by the Borrelia burgdorferi bacterium, is known for its complex nature and varying symptoms, which can be attributed to the diversity of strains and species within the Borrelia genus. There are multiple strains of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto, as well as other species like Borrelia garinii and Borrelia afzelii, which are known to cause Lyme disease in humans[20][21]. These strains and species can differ significantly in their geographic distribution and the clinical symptoms they cause. For instance, B. burgdorferi sensu stricto is predominant in North America, while B. garinii and B. afzelii are more common in Eurasia[21].
Recent studies have shown that different strains of Borrelia burgdorferi can result in varying severity of Lyme disease symptoms. For example, the RST1 OspC type A strains, prevalent in the Northeastern United States, are associated with more severe symptoms such as joint swelling, fatigue, and neurological issues[19]. This highlights the need for strain-specific diagnostic tests to better tailor treatments, as the one-size-fits-all approach may not be effective for all patients[19].
In addition to Lyme disease, other stealth pathogens can cause similar symptoms. These pathogens, like certain strains of Borrelia that are not commonly tested for, can complicate diagnosis and treatment. The diversity and complexity of these infections underscore the importance of comprehensive testing and personalized medical approaches to effectively manage Lyme disease and similar conditions[22][23].
Read More
[1] https://medlineplus.gov/lab-tests/c-reactive-protein-crp-test/
[2] https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?contentid=c_reactive_protein_serum&contenttypeid=167
[3] https://www.sepsis.org/sepsis-basics/testing-for-sepsis/
[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7152028/
[5] https://www.testing.com/tests/c-reactive-protein-crp/
[6] https://www.cell.com/heliyon/pdf/S2405-8440%2824%2905403-3.pdf
[7] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1286457999800811
[8] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2797455
[9] https://www.horseshoecrab.org/research/sites/default/files/J%20Endotoxin%20Res_Sandra_11%20p168%20Tanw.pdf
[10] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6400226/
[11] https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-022-07223-7
[12] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2797455
[13] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7522093/
[14] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996630/
[15] https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9721/11/4/132
[16] https://www.lymedisease.org/lyme-disease-genetic-strains/
[17] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC154584/
[18] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microbiology_of_Lyme_disease
[19] https://igenex.com/tick-talk/an-overview-of-the-types-of-borrelia-that-cause-lyme-disease/
[20] https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/330178-overview
[21] https://www.tcimedicine.com/post/everything-you-need-to-know-about-lyme-disease
[22] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5029759/
[23] https://internationalmusician.org/new-strain-adds-to-complexity-of-lyme-disease/
[24] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/government-intervenes-false-claims-act-lawsuits-against-kaiser-permanente-affiliates
[25] https://www.courthousenews.com/insurers-accused-conspiring-deny-lyme-disease-coverage/
[26] https://www.lymedisease.org/torrey-v-idsa-kaiser-settles/
[27] https://casetext.com/case/cristantielli-v-kaiser-foundation-health-plan
[28] https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/961484
[29] https://aspire.care/tick-borne/lyme-co-infections-overview/
[30] https://www.merckmanuals.com/home/infections/rickettsial-and-related-infections/ehrlichiosis-and-anaplasmosis
[31] https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ehrlichiosis/symptoms-causes/syc-20372142
[32] https://dermnetnz.org/topics/ehrlichiosis-and-anaplasmosis
[33] https://ultravitalitymd.com/mold-illness-and-lyme-and-other-stealth-infections/
[34] https://www.drkevinpassero.com/services/lyme-disease-and-other-stealth-infections-diagnosis-and-treatment/
[35] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2882064/
[36] https://health.maryland.gov/phpa/pages/Ehrlich_Anapl.aspx
[37] https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/anaplasmosis/basics.html
[38] https://www.cdc.gov/anaplasmosis/about/index.html