Skip to content

Frequency Foundation

Twice the Energy with Half the Stress

Lyme Disease Persisters – Borrelia

The Biofilm frequency sets include many strains of borrelia which tend to cause increased blood pressure. Heat (hot bath 119 degrees or infrared lamp) dropped blood pressure to normal. Further investigator indicated that borrelia biofilms were disabled by heat and frequency sets were developed to target these organisms. Repeated application of biofilm frequencies normalized blood pressure for short periods. Only with application of one of the antibiotics in the second paper below did blood pressure normalize for extended periods.

[trx_button type=”square” style=”filled” size=”small” align=”center” link=”https://www.frequencyfoundation.com/product/biofilms-version-6-0/” popup=”no” top=”inherit” bottom=”inherit” left=”inherit” right=”inherit”]Biofilm Frequencies – Version 6.0[/trx_button]

Lyme Disease May Linger for 1 in 5 Because of “Persisters”

By Melinda Wenner Moyer in Scientific American on September 1, 2015

Lyme disease is a truly intractable puzzle. Scientists used to consider the tick-borne infection easy to conquer: patients, diagnosed by their bull’s-eye rash, could be cured with a weeks-long course of antibiotics. But in recent decades the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has realized that up to one in five Lyme patients exhibits persistent debilitating symptoms such as fatigue and pain, known as post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome, and no one understands why. The problem is growing. The incidence of Lyme in the U.S. has increased by about 70 percent over the past decade. Today experts estimate that at least 300,000 people in the U.S. are infected every year; in areas in the Northeast, more than half of adult black-legged ticks carry the Lyme bacterial spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi. Although the issue is far from settled, new research lends support to the controversial notion that the disease lingers because these bacteria evade antibiotics—and that timing drug treatments differently could eliminate some persistent infections…

Identification of novel activity against Borrelia burgdorferi persisters using an FDA approved drug library. Jie Feng, Ting Wang, Wanliang Shi, Shuo Zhang, David Sullivan, Paul G Auwaerter and Ying Zhang. Emerging Microbes and Infections (2014) 3, e49; doi:10.1038/emi.2014.53; published online 2 July 2014

Although antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease is effective in the majority of cases, especially during the early phase of the disease, a minority of patients suffer from post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS). It is unclear what mechanisms drive this problem, and although slow or ineffective killing of Borrelia burgdorferi has been suggested as an explanation, there is a lack of evidence that viable organisms are present in PTLDS. Although not a clinical surrogate, insight may be gained by examining stationary-phase in vitro Borrelia burgdorferi persisters that survive treatment with the antibiotics doxycycline and amoxicillin. To identify drug candidates that can eliminate B. burgdorferi persisters more effectively, we screened an Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug library consisting of 1524 compounds against stationary-phase B. burgdorferi by using a newly developed high throughput SYBR Green I/ propidium iodide (PI) assay. We identified 165 agents approved for use in other disease conditions that had more activity than doxycycline and amoxicillin against B. burgdorferi persisters. The top 27 drug candidates from the 165 hits were confirmed to have higher anti-persister activity than the current frontline antibiotics. Among the top 27 confirmed drug candidates from the 165 hits, daptomycin, clofazimine, carbomycin, sulfa drugs (e.g., sulfamethoxazole), and certain cephalosporins (e.g. cefoperazone) had the highest anti-persister activity. In addition, some drug candidates, such as daptomycin and clofazimine (which had the highest activity against non-growing persisters), had relatively poor activity or a high minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) against growing B. burgdorferi. Our findings may have implications for the development of a more effective treatment for Lyme disease and for the relief of long-term symptoms that afflict some Lyme disease patients.

Novocure.com – Fast Company #1 Innovator in Biotech

Mechanism of Action

Tumor Treating Fields, or TTFields, are low intensity, alternating electric fields within the intermediate frequency range. TTFields disrupt cell division through physical interactions with key molecules during mitosis. This non-invasive treatment targets solid tumors.
The beginning of mainstream electronic medicine. Novocure makes Fast Company top innovator list!

Pseudoscience: JAMA Exposes Fraud in Clinical Trials

Research Misconduct Identified by the US Food and Drug Administration

Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Out of the Peer-Reviewed Literature

Charles Seife, MS1
JAMA Intern Med. Published online February 09, 2015. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7774
Text Size: A A A

Importance  Every year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspects several hundred clinical sites performing biomedical research on human participants and occasionally finds evidence of substantial departures from good clinical practice and research misconduct. However, the FDA has no systematic method of communicating these findings to the scientific community, leaving open the possibility that research misconduct detected by a government agency goes unremarked in the peer-reviewed literature.
Objectives  To identify published clinical trials in which an FDA inspection found significant evidence of objectionable conditions or practices, to describe violations, and to determine whether the violations are mentioned in the peer-reviewed literature.
Design and Setting  Cross-sectional analysis of publicly available documents, dated from January 1, 1998, to September 30, 2013, describing FDA inspections of clinical trial sites in which significant evidence of objectionable conditions or practices was found.
Main Outcomes and Measures  For each inspection document that could be linked to a specific published clinical trial, the main measure was a yes/no determination of whether there was mention in the peer-reviewed literature of problems the FDA had identified.
Results  Fifty-seven published clinical trials were identified for which an FDA inspection of a trial site had found significant evidence of 1 or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, 22 trials (39%); problems with adverse events reporting, 14 trials (25%); protocol violations, 42 trials (74%); inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, 35 trials (61%); failure to protect the safety of patients and/or issues with oversight or informed consent, 30 trials (53%); and violations not otherwise categorized, 20 trials (35%). Only 3 of the 78 publications (4%) that resulted from trials in which the FDA found significant violations mentioned the objectionable conditions or practices found during the inspection. No corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other comments acknowledging the key issues identified by the inspection were subsequently published.
Conclusions and Relevance  When the FDA finds significant departures from good clinical practice, those findings are seldom reflected in the peer-reviewed literature, even when there is evidence of data fabrication or other forms of research misconduct.

What is one thing that you regret learning in medical school


★


What is one thing that you regret learning in medical school?

Jae Won JohJae Won Joh, sleepy medical dork

*sigh* Where to begin…

1) How colossally broken the U.S. healthcare system is.

  • How monumentally undereducated/misguided about health/medicine/ethics the people legislating healthcare are.
  • How desperately most physicians avoid thinking about the problem; indeed; how many actively contribute to it in order to chase “patient satisfaction”, the end-all-be-all these days in the highly political hospital world.
  • How mercilessly this hurts patients, particularly the underserved.


2) How uninvested most patients are in their own health.

  • How lazily most people would rather take a pill to control their obesity or cholesterol instead of watching less TV and getting up to go do some exercise.
  • How massively undereducated people are about basic nutrition facts that didn’t have to be explained to their ancestors just a few generations ago.


3) How uncertain the practice of “the standard of care” is.

  • How traditionally defined practices that legitimately may negatively affect patient care still survive. “This is how I was taught” is something I’ve heard way too often.
  • How forcefully evidence-based medicine struggles to make the rounds, as many have relatively little experience analyzing a study and how it should or should not affect their practice.
  • How tremendously difficult it really is to actually prove something of clinical value, namely due to the fact that ethically, experimentation on humans is seen as horrifyingly unethical…but at a certain point, you have to wonder if it’s not just as unethical to keep up practices that we’re not really sure are beneficial to the patient.


4) How minimally the process of educating a clinician has changed to adapt to modern times. Indeed, one wonders if we aren’t going backwards somewhat.

  • How ancient the system is, expecting every medical student to take the same courses/rotations for 3 years and then somehow differentiate themselves into the 145 different medical specialties. This originates from a time when it was legitimately possible to know just about everything in the field of medicine with enough time/study.
  • How favoring the system is to subservience, now that we have the hierarchy of attending physician, fellow, resident, medical student.
  • How frightening it is that we emphasize memorizing and spewing out answers on tests instead of looking at ways to test actual clinical competence.
  • How poorly the art of the physical exam is taught, in favor of far more expensive tests and imaging.


~~~~~
All that said, I still love what I do. There is much I would change if I had the power, but simply put, I do not; nor, I suspect, will I ever. So I do what good I can, when I can, where I can. We’ll see if any of this changes in the years to come.

Roundup is Really Bad News for You and Your Children!

A New Resistance

Forty years ago, a chemical was born. It’s in our food, water, air, soil, blood, urine and breast milk. We’re not Roundup Ready. It’s time for A New Resistance.

Flouride Makes Your Children Stupid!

A new brain study from Harvard (Choi et al. 2015) has prompted Phillipe Grandjean, author of Only One Chance, (Oxford Universtiry Press, 2013) to challenge the spin being used by fluoridation promoters to downplay the studies that have found an association between exposure to fluoride and lowered IQ. This commentary (Mottled fluoride debate) appears on Grandjean’s website (Chemical Brain Drain) and is printed in full below. Grandjean explains that for the children tested,
“Their lifetime exposures to fluoride from drinking water covered the full range allowed in the US. Among the findings, children with fluoride-induced mottling of their teeth – even the mildest forms that appears as whitish specks on the enamel – showed lower performance on some neuropsychological tests. This observation runs contrary to popular wisdom that the enamel effects represent a cosmetic problem only and not a sign of toxicity. At least one of five American children has some degree of mottling of their teeth.” (my emphasis, PC)
I would add that this comment further underlines the “mistake” being perpetrated by the officials at the EPA’s Office of Water who are incorrectly treating severe dental fluorosis as the most sensitive endpoint of fluoride’s toxicity in their risk assessment to determine a safe water goal (the MCLG) for fluoride. The end point of most concern should be lowered IQ.

Grandjean states, “Prevention of chemical brain drain should be considered at least as important as protection against caries.”

This very important commentary from Grandjean has more than justified the nearly 19 years effort by the Fluoride Action Network to draw the world’s attention to fluoride’s neurotoxicity (see www.FluorideAlert.org/issues/health/brain). Now that leading researchers in neuro-toxicology like Grandjean and Bellinger (another co-author of the most recent Choi paper) are articulating our long-held concerns perhaps more people will listen. But for people to listen they have to be told. The mass media is not telling them but we are. To continue this important educational effort (which has included paying to have many of the 42 IQ studies to be translated from Chinese) takes money. Please consider contributing to our annual fundraiser. Here is an update on that.

Tetanus Vaccines Laced With Sterilization Chemical in Africa

(NaturalNews) Tetanus vaccines given to millions of young women in Kenya have been confirmed by laboratories to contain a sterilization chemical that causes miscarriages, reports the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, a pro-vaccine organization.

A whopping 2.3 million young girls and women are in the process of being given the vaccine, pushed by UNICEF and the World Health Organization.

“We sent six samples from around Kenya to laboratories in South Africa. They tested positive for the HCG antigen,” Dr. Muhame Ngare of the Mercy Medical Centre in Nairobi told LifeSiteNews. “They were all laced with HCG.”

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047571_vaccines_sterilization_genocide.html#ixzz3IYvUSpmh

Pseudoscientic: Over 1/3 of Medical Journal Papers Present False Conclusions

Reanalyses of Randomized Clinical Trial Data

Shanil Ebrahim, PhD1,2,3,4; Zahra N. Sohani, MSc2,5; Luis Montoya, DDS6; Arnav Agarwal, BSc7; Kristian Thorlund, PhD1,2; Edward J. Mills, PhD1,2,8; John P. A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc1,9,10,11

Importance  Reanalyses of randomized clinical trial (RCT) data may help the scientific community assess the validity of reported trial results.
Objectives  To identify published reanalyses of RCT data, to characterize methodological and other differences between the original trial and reanalysis, to evaluate the independence of authors performing the reanalyses, and to assess whether the reanalysis changed interpretations from the original article about the types or numbers of patients who should be treated.
Design  We completed an electronic search of MEDLINE from inception to March 9, 2014, to identify all published studies that completed a reanalysis of individual patient data from previously published RCTs addressing the same hypothesis as the original RCT. Four data extractors independently screened articles and extracted data.
Main Outcomes and Measures  Changes in direction and magnitude of treatment effect, statistical significance, and interpretation about the types or numbers of patients who should be treated.
Results  We identified 37 eligible reanalyses in 36 published articles, 5 of which were performed by entirely independent authors (2 based on publicly available data and 2 on data that were provided on request; data availability was unclear for 1). Reanalyses differed most commonly in statistical or analytical approaches (n = 18) and in definitions or measurements of the outcome of interest (n = 12). Four reanalyses changed the direction and 2 changed the magnitude of treatment effect, whereas 4 led to changes in statistical significance of findings. Thirteen reanalyses (35%) led to interpretations different from that of the original article, 3 (8%) showing that different patients should be treated; 1 (3%), that fewer patients should be treated; and 9 (24%), that more patients should be treated.
Conclusions and Relevance  A small number of reanalyses of RCTs have been published to date. Only a few were conducted by entirely independent authors. Thirty-five percent of published reanalyses led to changes in findings that implied conclusions different from those of the original article about the types and number of patients who should be treated.

Stealth Fat Virus – cfAssphage Version 1.0

Researchers find new gut virus that exists in over 50% of humans
Submitted by Tim Mayr on Sun, 07/27/2014 – 03:37
Researchers at San Diego State University have discovered a gut virus that exists in more than half of the world’s population, and plays a key role in the onset of conditions including obesity and diabetes.
The newly discovered gut virus, termed as crAssphage, infects Bacteroidetes, which is a highly common gut bacterium, and is widely prevalent in the environment. It exists in sea water, sediments, soil, as well as the guts of humans and animals.
The researchers stumbled upon crAssphage virus while examining the DNA fecal samples of twelve individuals. They found that a specific cluster of viral DNA that they found in the samples didn’t match any of the already known viruses.
Bioinformatics Proferssor Robert A. Edwards said he and his colleagues were shocked to find that such a widespread virus had gone undetected so far.
Speaking on the topic, Edwards said, “It’s not unusual to go looking for a novel virus and find one. But it’s very unusual to find one that so many people have in common. The fact that it’s flown under the radar for so long is very strange.”
To prove the existence of the new virus in nature, they used the DNA amplification technique, which located the new virus in the original samples to build up the National Institute of Health’s database.

The researchers are now trying to grow the virus in a laboratory, and their next step will be to find out how the virus affects gut bacteria in humans and animals.
Frequencies are available to subscribers.

Biofilms Prevent Antibiotics From Treating Lyme Disease: Shea Medical

Above and Beyond Antibiotics

Antibiotics are not enough to treat Lyme disease according to a new study in mice by Columbia University. Doctor Brian Fallon, director of the Lyme and Tick Borne Diseases Research Center at Columbia University, conducted a shocking experiment. The experiment was with lab mice that were infected with spirochetal bacteria (the underlying cause of Lyme disease). The mice were treated with antibiotics and later exposed to non-infected ticks. The ticks, after being exposed to the antibiotic treated mice still became carriers for the infection. The findings pointed to the fact that antibiotics don’t cure Lyme disease. We understand that studies in mice do not always correlate to human studies but in over a decade of treating Lyme disease patients this data matches exactly what we have found clinically in our practice. Antibiotics are not enough. However, our medical group has discovered a revolutionary solution for patients to improve their quality of life.

We have found that Biofilm impedes the ability for antibiotics and other treatments to help patients. Biofilm is any group of micro-organisms whose cells stick to each other on a surface, kind of like a slime that protects infections. New research according to the University of New Haven suggests that Biofilm is protecting the Lyme disease spirochete from antibiotics and any therapy not containing a method to strip this biofilm may prove to be inferior. This is why a more comprehensive approach to medicine and treatment is required to help patients with Lyme disease. We have found a targeted method of delivering antibiotics and penetrating the biofilm makes treatment much more effective for our patients.

There are many other reasons why antibiotics alone are not enough to cure Lyme disease. One reason is that most patients have multiple infections including viral, fungal and parasites along with other co-infections of tick borne illnesses – antibiotics only fight bacteria. Another reason is that some patients are immune compromised to begin with and they have other functional medicine disorders which predispose them to developing chronic Lyme disease complex – antibiotics do not strengthen the immune system. Bottom line, patients need a more comprehensive treatment plan to better combat the disease.

The CDC and infectious disease community have been underplaying this disease for decades by claiming that all a patient needs is antibiotic to be cured. The data from Columbia University flies in the face of the current treatment philosophy for Lyme disease but our group agrees with the findings and has made the appropriate adjustments to help patients. Most patients follow the standard recommendations that have been set forth by the CDC.The CDC claims on their website, “Most cases of Lyme disease can be treated successfully with a few weeks of antibiotics.” They also say, “Approximately 10-20% of patients (particularly those who were diagnosed later), following appropriate antibiotic treatment, may have persistent or recurrent symptoms and are considered to have Post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS).” Based on the study from Columbia University, those numbers might be much greater than stated by the CDC, and these patients might resurface with fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases. In our clinical experience a high percentage of patients that we come across have chronic infections that are untreated.

For more see Shea Medical …