support group meeting in Tampa

[Sadsack]

The meeting went well in some respects. I'll address those first.

Both the Vet and the Neuropsychologist did come. Altogether, there were 15 people. Both professionals seemed to have no reservations about this malady, and did review some of the published Morgellons Research.

The dissapointing part for me was that we were hoping for some suggestions re: short-cutting the process in order to have a small study that could be used as a springboard to move onto a larger study.
The things that were reviewed were the steps involved in doing a large study that would have statistical significance. That meant grant applications (often professional grant writers do this) in order to obtain funding. Once funding was secured, then the hunt for a setting where the study would be done.
An effort of that size requires research and grant-writing skills, great organizational skills, energy, and knowledge of the sites where research of this kind could take place.
Years....which I think maybe a lot of us don't think we have or can wait for...

Right now it seems the only one who is publishing anything new is Dr. Staninger (through the NREP Journal of Environment and Sustainablity). Dr. Savely published something recently in a Lyme paper, but it was not new physical research findings. The MRF, CDC, and Dr. Wymore have been quiet on the "new findings" front.
It just seems like there are so many obstacles involved it's disheartening. Seems like someone big, rich, and important will have to get this (like Bill Gates or George Soros) in order for something to REALLY happen on that front.

But it was a good meeting. A few new people, and it is always good to be with others who have what you have...

SS

[Sadsack]

Forgot to mention - there was someone there who has been a patient of Ginger Savely's for quite awhile, and was discharged from treatment in Dec 09 because she is now symptom-free, (except for slight itchiness on her ears). She takes no more prescription medication, just supplements....
Weird...two of us in the same room, virtually symptom-free (me over two years) from completely different directions. Go figure.

SS

[Leessi 1]

Sadsack.. We've talked before on the phone & other forums.. If I have never told you before.. I sincerely want to thank you for all that you do for those of us who cannot.. It's encouraging to have you & others out there fighting for our cause.. I know I need to make the meetings.. Maybe one day.. I am going to see Dr Reed May 7th.. Finally..

Take care,
Elyse

[Sadsack]

Elyse!!!

Good to hear from you - I actually thought about you the other day and wondered how you are. I know it was rough for awhile.

Please do come to a meeting. There are so many of us suffering with this thing. It is so comforting to actually be in the company of others who have it. It is "normalizing", if that makes any sense.

SS

And thank you for your comments...

[Venetia]

SS,

You mention Dr Hilde and I just have to say a few things about her and Sh0shanna.

I purchased a FIR pad several years ago for a family member. A present. The family
member did not take it home- read: did not want it. It's a macho thing, evidently.

Because it was a present, I thought maybe this person would change their mind later. That
did not happen and the FIR remained in the package in my Den for years.

This past winter, I was really achy and thought about the pad. While feeling guilty about
using something that was given to a loved one, I decided it was silly to leave the FIR in
the box, unused, so I thought I would try it.

I had been using it for several months and it was helping relieve the joint and
muscle pain.

For about a week, give or take, I had been sleeping on the pad rather than just using it now and
then. One morning I awoke earlier than usual and found the pad really hot.
Looking at the control unit, it had melted. WHEW- I avoided becoming a 'crispy critter'.

I called ShOshanna on Good Friday and before the next friday rolled around a replacement FIR
was delivered. Amazing service.

I mention all this to caution others to use a surge protecter with the FIR. Sh0shanna thought
it may have been a power surge in the middle of the night that caused the problem with the unit.

Thought I would pass this along to the others with the FIR along with a testimonial about the
great response from them. I guess I am not used to people related to 'M' being so very kind. I
was impressed!

Also, re: Dr Hilde and her mention of the self replicating machines or 'robots'....

I am watching DVDs on The Truth Project with a small group of people. A Bible study to the max!
Great information:

The Truth Project

Last week, the focus was on the cell and DNA et al. There was a portion with an animated cell
and it showed the various functions of the cell to include the DNA double helix opening up to
become 'new DNA'... DNA along with many other cellular components performing their functions.
Awesome!

The narrator, well versed in all things cell and DNA related, used the same sort of terminology
that Dr Hilde uses such as the reference to the processes as a 'machine'. He also used the
term 'robot' in one instance while explaining replication, transcription, translation and more.

My point is that I have a new understanding of Dr Hilde's terminology. She speaks in a way that
we do not understand- are not used to. It is evidently common in her field. I did not understand
her quite as much until I watched that animated cell DVD.

Lastly, I would like to mention that I have started to take the Oxy caps again. Several weeks ago,
my right hand went numb. Mostly my fingers but that included a portion of my palm as well. After
a couple Oxy caps, the numbness goes away. Unfortunately, if I don't take the caps, numbness returns.

I mention that to point out that Dr Hilde was the only person that I can recall that suggested
the Oxy capsules.

As the other community members, I have been confused over the years by the different 'factions'
casting aspersions- this way and that way- so I felt the need to state something factual and positive
about Dr Hilde.

Many thanks to her for all the above!

~V~

[Sadsack]

V -

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this all out. So many times we go along, and even when something good happens we don't stop to share that information.

You also did a great job capturing how the way she talks is unfamiliar to us and may sound like hocus pocus.

Bioengineering, nanotechnology, etc, is so advanced that the average person would be shocked if told what is being done. So to us, this stuff seems like science fiction....but it's real.

I just pulled a random article from the science pages to give people an idea of how sophisticated this stuff is. It crosses a variety of domains, including nanotechnology:

Forcing bacteria to copy artificial DNA

By Yun Xie | Last updated May 22, 2009 10:42 AM

The elegant structure of DNA has inspired chemists for decades. The simple pairings of the four native nucleobases (adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine) produces all of the genetic variations in every known living organism. Based on that basic principle, scientists have made modifications to DNA for a variety of purposes, from creating photonic wires for nanomachines to making completely unnatural DNA for engineered genetics. One aspect of DNA's natural behavior, however, has eluded scientists: DNA replication.
DNA polymerases, which produce copies of DNA molecules, are enzymes that have evolved for millennia, and there has been little success in getting them to work on artificial DNA in living cells. For the development of engineered genetics, it would be advantageous to find ways to hijack a cell’s enzymes for the replication of unnatural DNA. In working towards that goal, Eric Kool and his colleagues from Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology managed to insert and replicate artificial DNA in E. coli cells. This first successful example of bypassing the natural cellular replication machinery was published as an advanced article in the Angewandte Chemie International Edition.
The researchers supersized native nucleobases to create unnatural ones that are 2.4 angstroms bigger, which is slightly less than the diameter of a water molecule (2.75 angstroms). While the artificial nucleobases are noticeably bigger, they still maintain the ability to hydrogen bond with their natural counterparts.

The significant size difference will probably hinder most DNA polymerases, but every organism produces a number of specialized polymerases; the normal hydrogen bonding of these extended bases might allow a few of these to work efficiently. Some of these polymerases have evolved to work around damaged DNA, which makes them good candidates to operate with nucleobases that are larger than normal.
To determine if any of the polymerases in a living cell would work on completely unnatural DNA, the authors placed strands of artificial DNA into a viral genome and inserted it into E. coli cells. They then measured the efficiency and accuracy of DNA replication in both healthy and UV-damaged bacteria cells. They hypothesized that the UV damage would activate more specialized polymerases that can handle greater variation in DNA structure, making replication easier for unnatural DNA.
In terms of replication efficiency, UV exposure was advantageous for artificial DNA. Replication for xAdenine and xThymine were just as efficient as natural adenine and thymine—that’s a 20 to 27 percent improvement from their replication in undamaged cells. The efficiency for xCytosine was 53 percent and xGuanine was 45 percent. While those values are low, they are significantly better than what was obtained in undamaged cells, where the efficiencies were 29 percent for xCytosine and 11 percent for xGuanine.
As for replication accuracy, xAdenine did the best, as 99 percent of the daughter phage had the correct placement of adenine. Next best was xCytosine with 88 percent fidelity. The other two nucleobases had negligible replication accuracy.
Even though the replication accuracy and efficiency were uneven for the four unnatural nucleobases, the authors have successfully shown that it is possible for DNA polymerase to process the genetic information stored in artificial DNA. This paves the way for further engineering to improve replication, which would give scientists better control of biological systems


Forcing bacteria to copy artificial DNA

SS