Are biofilm agents alone enough to slow LD progress?

I thought just using just biofilm agents would possibly make you worse if you weren’t also taking the “killing “ agents (antibiotics/herbs)

its an interesting question

i will offer a bit of a brain dump on what i have come across on the topic

anti-biofilm agents are intended to either
- directly break up by dissolving proteins etc in the extracellular matrix (biofilm)
- or discourage the bacteria from staying in the biofilm colonies by chemical signalling methods - such as blocking Quorum sensing
- or structurally weakening the biofilm matrix via some other action - such as xylitol is thought to do - via feeding the bacteria unsuitable substrate from which they are thought to make substandard biofilm.

what happens after you do that is probably highly dependent on the hosts condition and that of their immune system.

there is a study in school age children for recurrent middle ear infections that only used xylitol - and found something like a 50% reduction in incidence - but this was a relatively small trial - and these were otherwise healthy young children

in sicker people - eg those with chronic lyme - its thought of as a risk - as these compounds do not do any killing - simply break up the slow growing and static biofilm colonies, thereby releasing viable mobile fast growing bacteria to go and start more colonies elsewhere inside the host ( unless the immune system is able to mop them all up first - which seems unlikely in chronically ill people who, after all, are already sick because their immune system has already been overwhelmed by these same infections).

my guess is it is probably pretty neutral in those who's immune systems are competent and are already keeping lyme type infections in check - maybe it could be a benefit if they are on the edge - but equally its possible if they were just about managing and then had a surge of inflammation from the bacteria released by the biofilm agents and consumed by macrophages - it could even push the immune system over the edge into dysfunction. but largely i suspect those that were going to get iill - would get ill anyway - and those that weren't would have little or no benefit

these infections are not a localised puss filled abscess as in the ear infections - but a systemic distributed tissue infection - as such they are typically much much harder to eradicate so i think Xylitol is just one string to the bow of treatments to be used in combination with powerful antimicrobials - rather than any kind of stand alone

i also seem to recall there are also studies showing an increase in antimicrobial resistance genes in the gut microbiota of those consuming xylitol regularly - so there could be other downsides of using it continuously long term. it also causes increased insulin release which is not desirable long term. so its worth remembering that even so called "natural" substances or supplements are not necessarily risk free because they state that they are somehow natural (xylitol can be extracted from birch bark - and as such meets some industry definitions of natural - but realistically humans would not have encountered it in refined forms in their evolutionary past so we should be aware that there are likely off target consequences to its consumption).

hope its of some help