Burning & Bartonella

For those with known bartonella, do you ever have burning sensations in your tissues, insides, head, face, or skin?

I have always associated burning with mold but am curious if bartonella also causes burning. If you had the burning, what made it go away?

So the burning is mostly mold then on face? I think Bart burns on shins and balls of feet.

Ive had/have burning pain - I think mine is/was bart. I'm pretty sure my dominant infection is/has been bartonella.
I have had many cat and flea bites throughout my life.

Sometimes my upper back/thoracic area has burning pain - still to this day.

I've not had a lot of muscle type pain...mine has/is mostly nerve type pain. lucky me.

I need help. This is a big scary thing for me as Idk what's causing my burning. I remember as a kid a had burning feet. I thought they were maybe sweaty bt never knew if bart as a kid. Fast forward now I'm older and the only thing I can recall leading up to the first burning sensation in my head/brain was flea/dustmite bites???! I have no idea what bit me I know bed bugs bite in a line bt I didnt have bed bugs and they were bright red and super itchy maybe flea bites as our neighbors had cats and dogs and fleas. The itchy bites I'd scratch and it would turn into scars then dissapeared in a week. Never found out what I was bit by. And then the good old black mold I was exposed to as well. And it was a lot of mold. So who knows I suspect bart bigtime bt had neg testing to henslae and quint. Bt there are more strains

Girlie said...
“ So who knows I suspect bart bigtime bt had neg testing to henslae and quint. Bt there are more strains“

And high false negatives with coinfection testing

Have u ever had false neg testing for bart?

Girlie said...
“ So who knows I suspect bart bigtime bt had neg testing to henslae and quint. Bt there are more strains“

And high false negatives with coinfection testing

i write this a lot as it seems to be under appreciated how poor testing for chronic bartonella infections is - or is just plain confusing to a lot of people.

the problem is sensitivity ( high false negative rate )

best test on the market for bartonella by a long shot is the Galaxy's latest digital droplet PCR method
they work very hard to get the sensitivity up:
-3 blood draws on different days
-culture the samples in special media for around 1 week
-run digital droplet pcr on the culture thousands of times and statistically combine the results

even after all that effort, way more than a standard PCR or ELISA test, in their published paper they are still only able to claim a 49% sensitivity - in other words they still miss more positive cases that they detect.

regular PCR or regular ELISA ( serology ) tests are thought to be in the region of 20% sensitive

in the light of this - a person concluding they DO NOT have bartonella based on a ANY of the above tests is very hard to support logically.

so its important to recognise the asymmetry in the meaning of test results - driven by the large asymmetry in the sensitivity and specificity of the tests themselves.

eg
a positive result in a test that has a 90+% specificity can sensibly be used as evidence to support a diagnosis (though there is still a 1/10 chance it is wrong)

whereas a negative result in a test with 50% sensitivity does not mean anything at all ....