Reply To: Biofilms of borrelia burgdorferi – 6 years to accceptance in PLOs ONE

The Silent Role of Biofilms in Chronic Disease › Forums › Biofilm Community › Biofilm Buzz › Biofilms of borrelia burgdorferi – 6 years to accceptance in PLOs ONE › Reply To: Biofilms of borrelia burgdorferi – 6 years to accceptance in PLOs ONE

October 15, 2012 at 7:09 pm #3223 Score: 0
Harrison
Keymaster
    2 pts

    Dr. MacDonald,

    Thanks again for sharing this information – and your willingness to ask for comments. How generous your dedication is to this important work! I have a few questions and comments:

    1. When will the paper be available to the public?

    2. It appears that Bb’s biofilm capabilities are more advanced than other biofilms – you compare them with treponemes. Is it a foregone conclusion that Bb’s awesome array of microbiological defenses are the basis of its chronic life cycle with human hosts?

    3. Many (like me) believe the answer to the above is “yes,” but the medical establishment is still reluctant to accept these facts. In relation to the heart valve question – studies of heart valve pathologies have been performed and show significant infiltration of bacteria of different kinds. I know there’s more research out there, but I can’t find much on this. Here’s a few abstracts you must have seen:

    It’s peculiar that we haven’t we seen more molecular studies – especially since the infective etiology seems obvious. But I’d like to turn this assumption back into a challenge for you and your thought-leading colleagues: how do you prove that the existence of monomicrobial (spirochetal) or polymicrobial infection in the heart valve (et al) forms the basis of disease? Perhaps you don’t have to work that hard to prove that process of causation – which explains why we have seen so little of the molecular research!?

    In my interviews with various researchers, four different ones explained that endocarditis was typically a monomicrobial biofilm infection. That was always surprising to me..