A leading Bartonella doctor pioneered vast cures starting in the 2000s…. Evaluates Canadian “Bartonella Medicine.”

1. There is no top Bartonella medical expert in Canada. They may be trying. But government agencies are “anti-investigation” and profoundly limited in the study of what we already know.

2.  No Canadian lab has invested heavily to offer 2029 tests. They typically use old technology.

3.  The research we assembled shows that even lab studies looking for merely 1-2 of 23 human species (Schaller. 2025), the distribution is 39% in Asia, 18-36% in  Europe, 17-20% in EU graves for 1900 years, 21% in Brazil, and 38% in Africa. In contrast to the rest of the world, Canada reports Bartonella rates of a paltry 2.4%.

4. They write their positives are fairly vivid such as “probable” [huh?] B. Quintana, heart infections or enlarged lymph nodes”  as samples.

5. One “patient was deemed to have a false-positive result as his B. henselae titre was at the threshold for positivity, his B. quintana serologic test gave a negative result, and his clinical syndrome was not suggestive of Bartonella infection. 

[When do infectious disease doctors learn about the clinical symptoms of Bartonella? I learned 45 seconds in medical school. I have read everything I can find in print on Bartonella for the strong textbook I am hoping to wind down and finish. Why? Because the tiny number of physicians who are actual experts on this bacteria is stunning.

Typical CME infection experts on Bartonella show they are over 30 years behind and stuck in 1991. They think things like enlarged lymph nodes are the norm. No, they are at about 3%. Max.]

Bartonella is in red blood cells, on the edge of RBCs, in blood plasma, and in the walls of 60,000 miles of tubing in the human body.

6. Bartonella is not trivial as thery write, “Two patients died; both had multivalvular B. quintana endocarditis with ruptured intracranial mycotic aneurysms.”

7. They usefully mention Bartonella is a clot maker. I agree based on 26 years of treating it.