Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

Here you can discuss different microscopic techniques and illumination methods, such as Brightfield, Darkfield, Phase Contrast, DIC, Oblique illumination, etc.
Post Reply
Message
Author
jeroen
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:17 pm

Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#1 Post by jeroen » Thu Dec 23, 2021 10:06 am

I was wondering if using blood thinners will create any visible effects under a dark field microscope. Would be great if anyone has any feedback.

Thing is, I got stents last year, and have been taking an Aspirin/Plavix combo since then. I should now stop the Plavix, but I am a bit reluctant. On the one hand because there are some horror stories about 'late stent thrombosis' related to a sudden Plavix stop, and on the other hand because Plavix had some heavy side effects when I started taking them (skin bleeding, constipation), but those effects disappear after a couple of months, so it feels like the body partly compensated the Plavix, which makes me afraid of the blood now getting too 'thick' when I abruptly stop taking them.

Cardiologist thought I was overly afraid, but I have been taking a half dose daily for a month now, and want to slowly stop altogether.

We happen to have a good dark field microscope at home, so I thought it might be a good idea to look at the blood daily, and try to detect changes. But is this realistic at all? Can there be a visible difference? We see some large thrombocytes here and there, but actually, the visible differences are quite large from day to day, so maybe this is more due to food, stress, luck etc.

Would be great if you could share any knowledge about this.

Many thanks,
Jeroen

PS I'm not even sure if this is the best forum or even platform to ask such a question, but I couldn't think of a better place. Apologies if it ins't...

BramHuntingNematodes
Posts: 1538
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:29 am
Location: Georgia, USA

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#2 Post by BramHuntingNematodes » Thu Dec 23, 2021 3:15 pm

Some information can be gleaned by the lab microscopist with the aid of a hemocytometer, but it is a specialized practice that you would want professional training in for good reproducible results. The interpretation of this information also should be left to those that have a good deal of medical training and are impartial i.e. not the patient.
1942 Bausch and Lomb Series T Dynoptic, Custom Illumination

Tom Jones
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:47 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#3 Post by Tom Jones » Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:27 pm

The short answer is no. There is nothing to see. Those affect platelet function, generally not platelet size or number.

jeroen
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:17 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#4 Post by jeroen » Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:50 pm

Thanks a lot guys. My wife wanted me to ask if the people who replied are not general 'darkfield sceptics'. The darkfield microscope is hers, and she is used to meeting people who are sceptic about the whole technology. I look through the oculars from time to time, and must say I do believe one can see a lot with this technique. Yet I can also believe you guys here if you say that the effects of Plavix can hardly be seen this way.

Anyway, glad we found these forums!

viktor j nilsson
Posts: 760
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:12 pm
Location: Lund, Sweden

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#5 Post by viktor j nilsson » Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:10 pm

Of course you can see "a lot of things" when you observe blood cells under darkfield illumination. But ithe field of "live blood analysis" is a classical example of quackery and a money grab with no scientific basis.

Also, this thread comes very close to asking for health advise, which this forum prohibits. So I would talk to your doctor about your health, rather than us, or, even worse, some pseudoscientific charlatans with a darkfield microscope.

jeroen
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:17 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#6 Post by jeroen » Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:51 pm

viktor j nilsson wrote:
Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:10 pm
some pseudoscientific charlatans with a darkfield microscope.
You are talking about my wife here. I am also sceptical of the darkfield technique, but find it interesting to look at it. I always ask medical doctors for help of course. I was just asking if the effects of Plavix could possibly be seen under a darkfield microscope. Not asking for medical help at all. And again, no need to insult my wife.

jeroen
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:17 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#7 Post by jeroen » Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:53 pm

Tom Jones wrote:
Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:27 pm
The short answer is no. There is nothing to see. Those affect platelet function, generally not platelet size or number.
That sort of matches with what I was expecting. Thanks for your feedback.

viktor j nilsson
Posts: 760
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:12 pm
Location: Lund, Sweden

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#8 Post by viktor j nilsson » Thu Dec 23, 2021 7:22 pm

jeroen wrote:
Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:51 pm
viktor j nilsson wrote:
Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:10 pm
some pseudoscientific charlatans with a darkfield microscope.
You are talking about my wife here. I am also sceptical of the darkfield technique, but find it interesting to look at it. I always ask medical doctors for help of course. I was just asking if the effects of Plavix could possibly be seen under a darkfield microscope. Not asking for medical help at all. And again, no need to insult my wife.
Sorry, but I don't see how what I said was insulting to your wife. I never assumed or implied that she was one of the quacks making money from fooling people. I just assumed that she had been attracted by what the quacks are selling. I really hope she isn't involved in making money off of other people's insecurities regarding their health. I definitely don't blame anyone falling for things like this, I can fully understand why someone would feel attracted by pseudoscientific ideas, especially if they feel that their symptoms aren't taken seriously by traditional medicine. But I don't think that there is any need for being polite: live blood analysis is nonsense.

User avatar
zzffnn
Posts: 3200
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Houston, Texas, USA
Contact:

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#9 Post by zzffnn » Thu Dec 23, 2021 7:41 pm

I enjoy darkfield microscopy. But it is not a reliable method to detect platelet function. Not even close.

If you really want to do such test at home, you should at least emulate what the professionals do:

https://mlabs.umich.edu/tests/p2y12-pla ... ction-test

https://www.healthcare.uiowa.edu/path_h ... _func.html

That test is very difficult to emulate at home.

dtsh
Posts: 977
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 6:06 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#10 Post by dtsh » Fri Dec 24, 2021 2:56 am

jeroen wrote:
Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:50 pm
Thanks a lot guys. My wife wanted me to ask if the people who replied are not general 'darkfield sceptics'. The darkfield microscope is hers, and she is used to meeting people who are sceptic about the whole technology. I look through the oculars from time to time, and must say I do believe one can see a lot with this technique. Yet I can also believe you guys here if you say that the effects of Plavix can hardly be seen this way.

Anyway, glad we found these forums!
I believe here "darkfield" is meaning two different things, first, there's a microscopy method called darkfield, in which a cone of light illuminates the specimen on a dark background. The process is quite old and well studied and is commonly used here. I occasionally put in my darkfield condenser and view specimens that way. I don't think anyone contests the process. The same setup works on your microscope as it does mine.

There's another usage of "darkfield" in which there are claims of the ability to observe a large number of illnesses via examining blood with the above method. It is my understanding that there is no evidence to support it as a reliable method of diagnossis in general. This second one is problematic as diagnosing health conditions via a forum is a bad idea, diagnosing them with non-scientific methods via a forum is dangerous, and thus not allowed here.

You can call me a skeptic, but I'll happily change my mind if provided with evidence; I have yet to find any.

Dubious
Posts: 426
Joined: Sun May 09, 2021 7:55 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#11 Post by Dubious » Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:10 am

Well, I learned something new. I had not heard of darkfield/live blood analysis before reading this thread, but it apparently does exist, and there's even a Wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_blood_analysis

Seriously though, while I don't minimize your issue or concerns and wish you the best, observation with a microscope cannot substitute for a blood count test performed in a lab. On the other hand, your doctor may know of options for more frequent monitoring of your blood count, and you should ask him/her. (One of my New Year's resolutions is going to be to bother my own doctor more about my health issues...)

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#12 Post by apochronaut » Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:40 pm

That wikipedia page although probably correct in highlighting various cases of fraudulent practice states it's case a little too strongly on at least one count and possibly others. The idea that pleomorphism doesn't exist is ludicrous. Of course a Zebra can't change into a monkey but many yeasts have a mold phase and can easily be found to develop mycelium. In the deeper microbiological realm, pleomorphism is rampant. A number of the world's most notable and forward looking microbiologists spent their careers studying pleomorphism in bacteria. While tranference of species is not recognized by anyone, a huge number of more entrenched microbiologists still adhere to rigid morphology as a basis for speciation, when in fact multitudes of bacteria can take on various morphological forms.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Domingue

One of the most aggregious pieces of so called information in the wikipedia page is that someone was convicted of using live blood analysis to diagnose Lyme disease or Borrelia Burgdorferii, the very same technique internationally recognized as a standard laboratory procedure to diagnose Treponema Pallidum, the causative agent of syphilis, also a highly transparent spirochaete. In actual fact, you can diagnose Lyme disease using dark field microscopy of blood. I know this because I have done it. It is hard for a doctor to argue against pictures of spirochaetes in someone's blood.
Perhaps if you call it live blood analysis it is quackery but if it is laboratory microscopy it is valid.

Eva Sapi has a more rational view of pleomorphism.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AmvgOfIN_8c

Dubious
Posts: 426
Joined: Sun May 09, 2021 7:55 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#13 Post by Dubious » Fri Dec 24, 2021 6:27 pm

I did not mean to take a position on live blood analysis by citing the article. Wikipedia is an interesting resource--good for determining that a field exists, as here, or even finding out the truth about things that aren't in significant controversy, like the distance to the sun or many historical facts; but otherwise its articles are often influenced by a sort of judgmental mob mentality. Anyway, of course a microscope is a valuable, even indispensable, lab instrument for many types of examination and diagnosis, and I don't doubt what you say. My point was just that, for determining blood count, it can't substitute for the specialized machinery used in labs for that purpose, that objectively quantify the blood counts, etc. Even if a visual observation under a microscope could give a rough idea of, say, platelet count, and I'm not sure you are saying that, it would probably still be a lot like me trying to interpret my dental x-rays--where the dentist with her experience and training gets a lot of information out of what to me are faint smudges on the film. But why even go that somewhat subjective route when there are lab machines that can objectively quantify blood counts? I think there are even options for using a pin prick kit at home and sending in the samples.

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#14 Post by apochronaut » Fri Dec 24, 2021 7:53 pm

Dubious wrote:
Fri Dec 24, 2021 6:27 pm
I did not mean to take a position on live blood analysis by citing the article. Wikipedia is an interesting resource--good for determining that a field exists, as here, or even finding out the truth about things that aren't in significant controversy, like the distance to the sun or many historical facts; but otherwise its articles are often influenced by a sort of judgmental mob mentality. Anyway, of course a microscope is a valuable, even indispensable, lab instrument for many types of examination and diagnosis, and I don't doubt what you say. My point was just that, for determining blood count, it can't substitute for the specialized machinery used in labs for that purpose, objectively quantifying the blood counts, etc. Even if a visual observation under a microscope could give a rough idea of, say, platelet count, and I'm not sure you are saying that, it would probably still be a lot like me trying to interpret my dental x-rays--where the dentist with her experience and training gets a lot of information out of what to me are faint smudges on the film. But why even go that somewhat subjective route when there are lab machines that can objectively quantify blood counts? I think there are even options for using a pin prick kit at home and sending in the samples.
Blood counts are a smideon of the tests required for blood analysis. Assessing a blood smear is a broad spectrum assessment and unfortunately our insured or government funded medicare systems are not equipped to allow broad spectrum analysis. It is pretty cookie cutter. Other stuff has to be detailed by the doctor and not all is funded . In Ontario for instance a totally publicly funded healthcare system, only certain accredited tests are funded, those determined by a board. They are woefully innadequate because the goal has become saving money. You can get all the MRI s you want but you can't get a PSI unless you are under an imminent threat of prostate cancer. Direct observation of blood has merit but it is only done under a publicly or insurance funded sytem if it is the only way, because it takes time . Where the mistakes are made are that a medical establishment determines all and their determination is influenced by the companies that manufacture machines. Practitioner input is being ruled out largely by insurance issues. Machines are infallible. Doctors are floated by the security of insurance. In 1945, every doctor had a DF microscope so they could diagnose syphilis. Now that capability has been insured away. Other observations of blood are completely ignored as being invalid. Obviously you can't diagnose a dislocated shoulder but we make the mistake of believing that prescribed medical assessment is not a business and therefore optioned for the most economical assessment. Often, you get what you pay for.

Dubious
Posts: 426
Joined: Sun May 09, 2021 7:55 pm

Re: Blood thinners visible in dark field images?

#15 Post by Dubious » Sat Dec 25, 2021 2:04 am

Well, being in the US, I've generally envied Canadians their health care system--that is, the fact that they have one. But, I hear you; it seems to be a law of nature that any bureaucracy will have its brainless aspects. In the US, breast cancer got a lot of attention and research dollars, for political reasons, while prostate cancer was practically ignored, until Michael Milken, the "Junk Bond King," was diagnosed and became something of a crusader. Even now there is a huge disparity in funding:
https://www.fatherly.com/health-science ... st-cancer/

Post Reply