/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15572741
>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21179119/
This is a collection of multiple studies.
Which they obfuscate and cherry pick different results.
Not a trial to show the causation of a plasmodium causing the clinical disease of "muhlaria".
They did not even did the standard test to diagnose "muhlaria" after infection.
Also they did not even observe the disease.
As soon as:
"A real-time quantitative PCR assay based
on 18S ribosomal RNA gene transcripts has
been developed for tracking the kinetics of
developing parasitaemia before a positive
diagnosis of infection can be made from a
thick blood smear using microscopy"
So they did a PCR which not even is a "gold standard".
which of course lead to:
"these abnormalities did not
result in clinical manifestations and they
resolved after a few days"


The mention a second study in which they used microscopy as a "diagnosis method":
https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/175/4/915/943953

Which did not even compare the course of the so called disease:
There is not even an "correlation" with the amount of "parasites" detected with lab techniques, but no matter if the participant of the study was symptomatic, they initiated always a therapy.
Which for some odd reason "increased" the disease.

"but there are """"alternative explainations""""" ".

And there was literally NO not a single infection group in which they simply observed the spontanous course of the disease.
All volonteers either got:
doxycycline, mefloquine, oral chloroquine, or already took a prophylaxis and then got chemo therapy.

Not a single "sponatnous course" as a control group.
And they did even did not specify the symptoms, but allowed "any symptom" as "clinical symptom" of malaria.
Yet they did not even FIND CORRELATION with the parasite but the people who took the meds had worse symptoms, when the started with the therapy.