Statement of the BCA-clinic on the documentary entitled “Snyd eller Borrelia” of the Danish channel TV2 on 29.09.2016 | October 01, 2016
As we feared, the coverage of the Danish TV2 channel is grossly tendentious. In our view, it had unfortunately been orchestrated in a way that is purposefully unilateral against the treatment of patients suffering from late stages of Lyme borreliosis in Germany. Several patients, who had been interviewed by TV2, now complain on the TV2 website as well as on social media that the original content of their answers was misquoted i.e. that they criticised the German doctors rather than the poor health care in Denmark.
The testing procedures offered by BCA have proven their worth in Germany over many years in terms of detection and treatment of infections transmitted by ticks, and have been examined in numerous studies extensively and transparently documented on the BCA website. Strict attention is paid to the fact that all tests used in the BCA laboratory are of the respective highest available quality. Beyond pure detection, the cellular tests of the BCA additionally aim at providing the treating physicians with further diagnostic means, particularly with respect to the degree of activity of the Borrelia bacteria and the degree of inflammation. The BCA Research Department is working on a consistent further development of these tools.
A random sample covering individual weeks, which had been taken over several months, recently confirmed that even in the case of the BCA cellular tests, less than 15 percent of the samples on average had shown a clearly positive result ̶ despite the basic population which had been preselected by the physicians as cases in which borreliosis may be suspected. With a representative sample from a basic population and/or total population which has not been preselected, this value would even be much lower.
Apart from that, the way of reasoning of the documentary is in no way acceptable from our viewpoint. It is being suggested that a great number of blood samples had been tested in the BCA laboratory and found to be positive. Those who were present during the shooting merely remember two test results which were presented, and a verification of the names announced in the documentary resulted in no further hits. In addition, according to the documents presented by the team of reporters, one of the two samples was particularly strongly positive for Bartonella ̶ a frequent co-infection which, as far as we know, is not even included in the Scandinavian standard tests ̶ and therefore could never be positive in the cited Danish comparative test.
In both cases, the serological tests carried out by the BCA were negative. Since these serological tests are normally offered as the only procedure in Denmark, it is simply natural that the Danish comparative test showed negative results, assuming that merely the test usual in Denmark had been performed. Those who have ever dealt with the topic of Borrelia testing know the problem that the weak point of the serological tests is deemed to be precisely the fact that their result is wrongly negative in certain stages of the infection, even if symptoms clearly exist, which leads to the infection being overlooked.
Besides that, as explained, laboratory test results are never the sole basis of a borreliosis diagnosis but serve as a laboratory or work diagnosis, as Dr. Nicolaus is correctly cited in the documentary.
In this context, it is important that the selection of the requested tests is made jointly by the physician and the patient in accordance with the symptoms and the questioning inferred therefrom. In the process, all serological and cellular test results are only ever sub-elements of the specific diagnosis of the individual case. This at least was correctly reflected in the documentary. Only in very few cases, Borrelia in a person’s body finally lead to the Lyme disease or Lyme borreliosis. Then, it is the type and the severity of the symptoms that are decisive for a treatment and for the duration and type of the recommended treatment, but never a mere test result. Physicians treat ill patients, they do not treat tests. Lyme borreliosis is and continues to be a clinical diagnosis. We assure that the false patient in the documentary mentioned clearly more symptoms and further indications for borreliosis than it is being suggested here. Owing to medical confidentiality, we are unfortunately unable to publish the relevant documentation – even in the present case of an eminently massive and libellous attack.
Concerning the difference between clinical and laboratory diagnosis: this may be difficult for some to understand, but every treating physician who receives such a laboratory diagnosis knows this difference and acts accordingly. In addition, the BCA provides advice to treating external physicians as well if these have problems interpreting the test results. However, our laboratory currently always performs tests irrespective of whether it would be possible to mark the difference between “Borrelia” and “Lyme borreliosis” more strongly in order to ensure to an even greater extent that even a person who is not an English native speaker can recognize the difference immediately.
Furthermore, we point out as follows in light of recent events: the BCA-clinic does not offer dark-field microscopy, and therapy recommendations are never made unless a patient has personally consulted the treating physicians of the clinic.
Of course, we deeply regret that the much larger number of extremely satisfied, healed or very largely healed patients of the BCA-clinic did not get a chance at all to speak in the documentary. Even after the “attack”, using a hidden camera, falsified patients inventing stories, and pictures of alleged patients whom Dr. Nicolaus did not even know personally but who were dramatically imposed on us, we had offered the reporters on several occasions to support them in establishing such contacts. Obviously, nobody was interested in giving these patients the chance to express their views as well.
Your BCA Team