Using a microscope for diagnoses?

[Joeland]

Do any of the current tests for Lyme Disease, or co-infections use a microscope to actually view the blood on a slide? Like the old way blood was tested in a lab?

[cave76]

As explained excellently by mkh, dark field isn't pseudoscience. But it definitely takes someone with training to read what is seen.

Yet there have been many people who gained a lot of  interest - (among the no- so-wary or knowledgeable) in their use of dark field to explain what those little squiggles and other 'things' were in the blood of Lyme patients.

YouTube is rife with these people---- probably where the Wiki people got the impression that it's pseudoscience. That and the word "Zooinology" in one of them!

One in particular, a person on a different forum, used his own microscope and discovered the 'hatchlings' (his word) living in his blood. He said he had it confirmed by his ND doctor.

Oh, I could go on----- but I won't. :)

[mkh9]

Elleon_arual,
Well it does give a direction towards a spirochete or spiral shaped organism in the blood. And it does give a good direction to the doctor. Glad you were helped by it!
mkh9

[Elleon_arual]

Hello!

I believe that it is a VERY good way to diagnose. I went months without the doctors figuring out what was wrong. I finally went to a woman who looked at my live blood under a strong microscope and said I had every sign in my blood that points to Lyme. She led me in the direction of a Lyme literate doctor and lo and behold, she was right! I honestly believe she saved my life.

[mkh9]

You are welcome. Glad I could move the cobwebs to try to remember what we did back then.
mkh9

[JackieCalifornia]

Very informative -- and well said!  Thank you.

[mkh9]

No the current tests don't use a microscope to determine the identity of a bacteria. We do use the microscope to say that a specimen "looks like staphylococci, or streptococci or a rod shaped bacteira or if the doctor did order it and the lab had the capability the could do a dark field microscopy and look t see if the blood culture had a spiral shaped organism or not. I have actually worked at a county hospital as a microbiologist and yes in the past there was no PCR tests or western blots and serology to determine Lymes disease. All they could do was look for the rash. It is not "pseudo science " to look at the dark field microscopy to look for lymes disease it is just inaccurate. You can't tell Borrelia burgdorferi (lymes bacteria) from  other spirochetes such as Treponema pallidum (syphillus) but you can tell if it is a spirochete from some smaller spiral bacteria by the number of turns in their coils. I have seen Spirochetes in a blood culture in a dark field specimen. It was amazing to see it live and zipping around under the microscope. It was also scary to think this thing was living in someone. No the current best method is to not count coils it is a  PCR method by IgeneX. Best to get it from a Lyme Literate doctor or LLMD who knows to send your lab work to this reference lab. They have very accurate and sensitive testing. Hope this helps.
mkh9

[Joeland]

About a decade ago, the gold standard at my doctor's office lab was lancing a person's finger and looking at the blood on a slide under a microscope before being seen by the doctor. He was a rural, country doctor.

[cave76]

From Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_blood_analysis

Live blood analysis (LBA), live cell analysis, Hemaview or nutritional blood analysis is the use of high-resolution dark field microscopy to observe live blood cells.

Live blood analysis is promoted by some alternative medicine practitioners, who assert that it can diagnose a range of diseases. There is no scientific evidence that live blood analysis is reliable or effective, and it has been described as a fraudulent means of convincing patients that they are ill and should purchase dietary supplements.[1][2][3]

Live blood analysis is not accepted in laboratory practice and its validity as a laboratory test has not been established.[4]

"There is no scientific evidence for the validity of live blood analysis,[4] and it has been described as a pseudoscientific, bogus and fraudulent medical test.[5][6]

The field of live blood microscopy is unregulated, there is no training requirement for practitioners and no recognised qualification, no recognised medical validity to the results, and proponents have made false claims about both medical blood pathology testing and their own services, which some have refused to amend when instructed by the Advertising Standards Authority.[7]"

There will be many who will vigorously defend live blood analysis.