Thanks -- this is very well done and is full of useful information. Many simply blame rouleau on the shots. It's good to know about other possible causes as well as possible remedies.
So are digital addiction and the clot shot at the top of the list as the probable cause for the recent increase in seeing this pathology? Or is it because we are looking more?
Nobody knows the answer to this as most microscopists just see what they see and don't have a forum where they can get together and pool their findings. I haven't been doing this long so I have no comparison to the frequency of rouleaux before the clot shot or even before the phone addiction. I know rouleaux was widely spoken about long before the shots or smart phones by microscopists in Germany, around end 1990ies, beginning 2000. I believe dehydration is number one and easily tested again after drinking a few glasses of water.
Of course they exist but there are people and always have been long before nanotech existed who had rouleau and RBC aggregation. I’m just pointing out that just because there is rouleau it doesn’t necessarily mean there is nanotechnology in that blood. Claiming rouleau automatically means there is nanotechnology has become common place and gives dark field microscopy a bad name as this can easily be refuted. We must stick with truth to remain believable. It’s difficult enough convincing people that nanotechnology is in the blood.
Sorry to tell you , but our group thought the same thing more then a year ago , until we got high powered scopes with high power LED lights , then you can see inside the RBC, then your see the RBC has been invaded,
Thanks -- this is very well done and is full of useful information. Many simply blame rouleau on the shots. It's good to know about other possible causes as well as possible remedies.
So are digital addiction and the clot shot at the top of the list as the probable cause for the recent increase in seeing this pathology? Or is it because we are looking more?
Nobody knows the answer to this as most microscopists just see what they see and don't have a forum where they can get together and pool their findings. I haven't been doing this long so I have no comparison to the frequency of rouleaux before the clot shot or even before the phone addiction. I know rouleaux was widely spoken about long before the shots or smart phones by microscopists in Germany, around end 1990ies, beginning 2000. I believe dehydration is number one and easily tested again after drinking a few glasses of water.
what about the nano tech & quantim dots? Its not just clumpy blood
Of course they exist but there are people and always have been long before nanotech existed who had rouleau and RBC aggregation. I’m just pointing out that just because there is rouleau it doesn’t necessarily mean there is nanotechnology in that blood. Claiming rouleau automatically means there is nanotechnology has become common place and gives dark field microscopy a bad name as this can easily be refuted. We must stick with truth to remain believable. It’s difficult enough convincing people that nanotechnology is in the blood.
Sorry to tell you , but our group thought the same thing more then a year ago , until we got high powered scopes with high power LED lights , then you can see inside the RBC, then your see the RBC has been invaded,
Lab grade scopes are needed ,
With LED light about 20w , minimum,
I’m using a 16k$ scope at the moment
Without the led light hard to see
I have to check if it’s LED.
Highly recommend Greg Fredricks book.
Good post btw. Even how you take the sample or how you apply the cover slip can make a big difference.