home › The Candida Forum › Candida Questions › Candida testing. Stool vs blood. Which is more reliable? › Reply To: Candida testing. Stool vs blood. Which is more reliable?
As far as I understand, if a stool test shows candida, then you definitely do have candida. But if a stool test shows no candida, that does not mean that you do not have candida. You may have candida without it being detectable in your stool.
A blood test is more reliable.
Contrary to what some would like you to believe, a blood test does not test for candida in the blood. It does test for antigens in the blood. Antigens can be in the blood even if the candida is somewhere else; the presence of antigens just means that your body is fighting candida.
Ideally, a blood test should therefore be repeated. If the first blood test shows antigens against candida, this means that your body is combating candida, or has been in this fight recently. It does not show the outcome of this fight. Perhaps your body won the fight a few days ago but the antigens are still circulating; perhaps your body is still fighting, but it will win in a week or two.
If you do the blood test and it is positive for antigens against candida, and if you do the blood test again after (let’s say) three weeks, then it means that your body is continuously fighting candida, and it’s either losing or it’s an everlasting battle without a winner. In that case, you can seriously say you have a candida issue, and take appropriate measures.
The above is my current understanding. I’m still learning. If someone likes to add to the above, or to correct some or all of my words, please go ahead.