Candida testing. Stool vs blood. Which is more reliable?

Home The Candida Forum Candida Questions Candida testing. Stool vs blood. Which is more reliable?

This topic contains 8 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  TheXtremisT 4 years, 7 months ago.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #120352

    emzie89
    Member
    Topics: 14
    Replies: 31

    A stool test showed no candida, so my doctor came away from yeast causing my issues, and said it wasn’t worth retesting again. Now i have had yeast show up in a stool test before, so is this a good indication i don’t have a yeast problem? I have not tested by blood yet.

    #120354

    Rabelais
    Blocked
    Topics: 3
    Replies: 268


    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.

    Note:
    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.

    Rabelais

    #120355

    dvjorge
    Participant
    Topics: 283
    Replies: 1368

    Rabelais;58875 wrote:
    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.

    Note:
    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.

    Rabelais

    I will.!
    The antigen is the offender or a part of it. Antigens wake up an immune response. The immune system generates antibodies to neutralize the antigens. They bind together.

    Candida Immune Complexes in blood is an specific test to detect an intestinal fungal overgrowth.

    The most important reading of this test is the presence of immune complexes in blood. An immune complex is the binding between an antigen and an antibody.

    During an active intestinal fungal overgrowth yeast growth forming colonies and releasing metabolites. During this process, parts of the yeast cell wall are released inside the intestines. These parts crosses the intestinal barrier and are seen as yeast antigens by the immune system. The immune system responds sending IGG antibodies that bind with the antigens forming an immune complex.
    These immune complexes are seen under a microscopy and are evidence there is an overgrowth of yeast in the intestinal lumen.

    Until more immune complexes are found in the live blood analysis, more severe is the infection. People with sporadic candida cells in the intestines don’t have candida cell wall antigens circulating in their blood.

    The test also offer antigenic load and antibodies reading. The 3 numbers together give a reliable picture. However, the presence of immune complexes is enough.

    Hope this help.

    Jorge.

    Here you can see the test:

    http://www.cambridgebiomedical.com/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=1954&PortalId=0&TabId=155

    #120357

    Rabelais
    Blocked
    Topics: 3
    Replies: 268


    Thanks for the correction and the additions, Jorge.

    I seem to have mixed up ‘antigen’ and ‘antibody’, and I missed the immune complexes.

    One question relating to these immune complexes. As I understand them, they are the result of the binding of the antibodies that are produced by our immune system to the antigens that are produced by the invader (in this case: candida). However, this is all on the molecular level, so it’s invisible under a microscope.

    I’m specifically asking about this point because in Europe (don’t know about the USA), LBA is marketed as being able to see candida cells (!) in the blood through a microscope. This, of course, is nonsense, so it’s no surprise that LBA (at least in its European form) was quite easily proved a scam.

    How about the USA form of LBA? What exactly does it see through the microscope?

    And, back to the candida: in my understanding, immune cells diffuse through the body (they can leave the bloodstream), encounter candida, and then produce antibodies. These antibodies can then be detected in the blood (that’s what I was talking about in my first response), even though the candida itself is not present in the blood. Is this part of my understanding still correct, or am I missing something here too?

    Rabelais

    #120373

    dvjorge
    Participant
    Topics: 283
    Replies: 1368

    Rabelais;58878 wrote:
    Thanks for the correction and the additions, Jorge.

    I seem to have mixed up ‘antigen’ and ‘antibody’, and I missed the immune complexes.

    One question relating to these immune complexes. As I understand them, they are the result of the binding of the antibodies that are produced by our immune system to the antigens that are produced by the invader (in this case: candida). However, this is all on the molecular level, so it’s invisible under a microscope.

    I’m specifically asking about this point because in Europe (don’t know about the USA), LBA is marketed as being able to see candida cells (!) in the blood through a microscope. This, of course, is nonsense, so it’s no surprise that LBA (at least in its European form) was quite easily proved a scam.

    How about the USA form of LBA? What exactly does it see through the microscope?

    And, back to the candida: in my understanding, immune cells diffuse through the body (they can leave the bloodstream), encounter candida, and then produce antibodies. These antibodies can then be detected in the blood (that’s what I was talking about in my first response), even though the candida itself is not present in the blood. Is this part of my understanding still correct, or am I missing something here too?

    Rabelais

    Immune complexes are seen using electron microscope. LBA claims of candida cells are false, here, in Europe, or anywhere. It is possible to see live candida cells present in the blood but I bet a million when this happens the person has only a few hours to get emergency treatment to safe his/her life.
    It is possible they see fragments of the yeast cell wall or immune complexes and wrongly they claim it is candida live cells.

    Yes, antibodies can be detected in blood, even when the infection doesn’t exist anymore. However, in the case of this syndrome, the protective immune response is cell-mediated (th1)
    This syndrome is caused by a mucosal fungal infection. Antibodies aren’t the main immune response in this case. If candida reaches serum (blood), the antibodies are the main defense. This is another matter.

    A candida antibody blood panel isn’t effective because the infection is mucosal, and the humoral response don’t play a big role. Moreover, many healthy people have an slightly elevated candida antibody levels in blood because the battle between the immune system and candida begins since we are born. Candida is an intruder, a foreign organism that colonizes our tissues. It doesn’t belong to us, so the immune system has a 24 hours battle against it for life. The opposite is possible too. Some people have a severe mucosal yeast overgrowth and don’t show a positive antibody result because they are immune compromised.
    The acquired immune tolerance to candida is probably the main cause of this syndrome. If the antigen has lived with you for years, the immune system stops attacking it and begins to accept it as part of you. This happens when the antigen has been enough time with enough presence living in our body. It is known as an immune paralyzes.

    Anyway, the way to go is Candida Immune Complexes in blood.

    Jorge.

    #120378

    Rabelais
    Blocked
    Topics: 3
    Replies: 268


    That’s a thorough and clear description. Thanks!

    Rabelais

    #120379

    TheXtremisT
    Participant
    Topics: 12
    Replies: 126

    dvjorge;58894 wrote:


    Thanks for the correction and the additions, Jorge.

    I seem to have mixed up ‘antigen’ and ‘antibody’, and I missed the immune complexes.

    One question relating to these immune complexes. As I understand them, they are the result of the binding of the antibodies that are produced by our immune system to the antigens that are produced by the invader (in this case: candida). However, this is all on the molecular level, so it’s invisible under a microscope.

    I’m specifically asking about this point because in Europe (don’t know about the USA), LBA is marketed as being able to see candida cells (!) in the blood through a microscope. This, of course, is nonsense, so it’s no surprise that LBA (at least in its European form) was quite easily proved a scam.

    How about the USA form of LBA? What exactly does it see through the microscope?

    And, back to the candida: in my understanding, immune cells diffuse through the body (they can leave the bloodstream), encounter candida, and then produce antibodies. These antibodies can then be detected in the blood (that’s what I was talking about in my first response), even though the candida itself is not present in the blood. Is this part of my understanding still correct, or am I missing something here too?

    Rabelais

    Immune complexes are seen using electron microscope. LBA claims of candida cells are false, here, in Europe, or anywhere. It is possible to see live candida cells present in the blood but I bet a million when this happens the person has only a few hours to get emergency treatment to safe his/her life.
    It is possible they see fragments of the yeast cell wall or immune complexes and wrongly they claim it is candida live cells.

    Yes, antibodies can be detected in blood, even when the infection doesn’t exist anymore. However, in the case of this syndrome, the protective immune response is cell-mediated (th1)
    This syndrome is caused by a mucosal fungal infection. Antibodies aren’t the main immune response in this case. If candida reaches serum (blood), the antibodies are the main defense. This is another matter.

    A candida antibody blood panel isn’t effective because the infection is mucosal, and the humoral response don’t play a big role. Moreover, many healthy people have an slightly elevated candida antibody levels in blood because the battle between the immune system and candida begins since we are born. Candida is an intruder, a foreign organism that colonizes our tissues. It doesn’t belong to us, so the immune system has a 24 hours battle against it for life. The opposite is possible too. Some people have a severe mucosal yeast overgrowth and don’t show a positive antibody result because they are immune compromised.
    The acquired immune tolerance to candida is probably the main cause of this syndrome. If the antigen has lived with you for years, the immune system stops attacking it and begins to accept it as part of you. This happens when the antigen has been enough time with enough presence living in our body. It is known as an immune paralyzes.

    Anyway, the way to go is Candida Immune Complexes in blood.

    Jorge.

    This must be what happened to me. My blood test (and stool analysis) came up negative for candida, and my doctor doesn’t believe I have it, despite my thrush, itchyness and thyroid and adrenal problems still persisting. She’s refusing to believe I’m right that I have it, because she’s going by the evidence from the tests.

    I’m receiving a phone call later, I want to tell her what you’ve said, but feel she’ll dismiss it again.

    I really need Nystatin powder prescription, but she won’t give me it because of this. I want to start the retention enemas…

    #120380

    TheChosenOne
    Participant
    Topics: 34
    Replies: 410

    TheXtremisT;58900 wrote: This must be what happened to me. My blood test (and stool analysis) came up negative for candida, and my doctor doesn’t believe I have it, despite my thrush, itchyness and thyroid and adrenal problems still persisting. She’s refusing to believe I’m right that I have it, because she’s going by the evidence from the tests.

    I’m receiving a phone call later, I want to tell her what you’ve said, but feel she’ll dismiss it again.

    I really need Nystatin powder prescription, but she won’t give me it because of this. I want to start the retention enemas…

    This is the reason why our system of prescription drugs is wrong. Maybe if you look around on the internet, there might be reliable sources of nystatin.
    My stool test was negative, but my blood test was positive. What kind of blood test did she do?

    #120391

    TheXtremisT
    Participant
    Topics: 12
    Replies: 126

    TheChosenOne;58901 wrote:

    This must be what happened to me. My blood test (and stool analysis) came up negative for candida, and my doctor doesn’t believe I have it, despite my thrush, itchyness and thyroid and adrenal problems still persisting. She’s refusing to believe I’m right that I have it, because she’s going by the evidence from the tests.

    I’m receiving a phone call later, I want to tell her what you’ve said, but feel she’ll dismiss it again.

    I really need Nystatin powder prescription, but she won’t give me it because of this. I want to start the retention enemas…

    This is the reason why our system of prescription drugs is wrong. Maybe if you look around on the internet, there might be reliable sources of nystatin.
    My stool test was negative, but my blood test was positive. What kind of blood test did she do?

    Yeah I’m unfortunately going to have to search for it high and low on the net.

    I have the results somewhere, not sure exactly what is was but I’ll find out.

    Wondering if I should post the entire results & consultation advice she gave me. As expected, she hasn’t got everything correct but it’s a step in the right direction.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

The topic ‘Candida testing. Stool vs blood. Which is more reliable?’ is closed to new replies.