Doctors dismissing people with ongoing symptoms just b/c they attribute the symptoms to a disease the doctors don’t think exists is wrong. The # of sufferers is high enough to say, that SOMETHING must be causing this, & this refusal to investigate real symptoms on ideological grounds is just wrong. Maybe “chronic lyme disease” doesn’t exist, but SOMETHING must be causing its symptoms.
The sources for the provided article support the persistent symptoms after treating LD, and not the evidence of a persistent infection. In either case, we need to know for sure.
This article is regrettably poor. Unlike most physicians and researchers on Lyme, i have, in the past 12 years, read over 35,000 peer reviewed journal articles either directly about Lyme associated research or about aspects of that research that the journal articles raised as of interest. As well, I have had contact with some 25,000 people suffering from Lyme over that same time period. I have also written the most definitive text, correlating all that data, that now exists on the history, nature, dynamics in the ecosystem, both micro and macro, and the subtleties of its inflammatory dynamics in creating disease. Further, i examined, in depth, the actual data in all those journal articles on Lyme disease. Contrary to the article’s author, antibiotics are not a sure fire treatment for Lyme infections. Many studies do show effectiveness when antibiotics are first administered but there is as much as a 40% relapse rate, also well-described in journal studies. Even by the most optimistic studies, antibiotics are only 99% effective (this does not allow for relapse later). That still leaves one percent of those infected that do not get well. Borrelia bacteria are stealth organisms. They are very good at hiding in sequestered niches where antibiotics cannot reach them, such as inside our own cells. They are very old organisms and highly adaptable. They are masters at subverting cellular function for their own ends. Commonly, they break down cellular structures to obtain the nutrients they need to survive; they are parasitic organisms. Journal studies reveal that there are two conditions that commonly continue after the original infectious stage. The first is more properly called post-lyme disease syndrome, a condition in which the damage the infection caused is not being repaired by the body and in which fragments of borrelia organisms or cellular debris similar to those organisms or simple cellular debris from cell breakdown during infection continue to cause problems. In this instance there is no active Lyme infection though the symptoms may be very similar to infection. In the second case there are still Borrelia organisms present in the body, in low numbers, in protected niches where they continue to damage the body’s cellular tissues. One of the real difficulties in Lyme disease is that symptoms are often caused by very low numbers of the organism; they aren’t readily found by most tests. Further, the organisms are highly adaptable, they continue to alter their exterior protein coat, which makes them harder for the immune system to see, reproduce many variants of themselves all of whom possess slightly to very different genomic structures, and they learn as they go – they learn the particular bodily ecosystem they are in and adapt to it and our immune responses. Antibiotic treatment is simply not up to the task of treating stealth infections as they are with acute infections such as strep or staph (and in this statement, i don’t look at the resistance dynamics that are altering those microorganisms to the extent that antibiotics may not be useful at all in the coming decades). None of what i am saying here is news, it is carefully concealed in open access peer review journal articles. The problem, in every country, is that physicians virtually never have or take the time to read those articles in-depth; they just don’t do the research. Further, after 40 years of experience with technological medicine, in all its aspects, they rarely understand that they are in service to the ill and their job is to figure out what is wrong and to treat it. That demands continual education, a sense of humility, and an ability to serve. I truly wish that writers such as this one, who approach the subject with a preset bias, would simply do the research that complex, ecologically driven diseases demand to understand. I also wish they would understand that there are many problems in both science and medicine the way they are currently practiced and do some depth reading in this area. Recognizing that such problems exist does not make one anti-science or anti-medicine but rather allows the development of intellectual integrity, the ability to question and look deeply, without surrendering those qualities to mass thinking, something science and medicine have always had trouble with. Oh, and regarding Christian Perronne, any superficial search would turn up his credentials, which are, by scientific and medical standards, exemplary. The way the article is written is as close to directly attacking his reputation as one can get without overtly crossing the line. Should the writer have any attack of conscience, here is a link that outlines his credentials and experience: https://ww2.eventrebels.com/er/CFP/AgendaAtAGlance.jsp?CFPID=690&ScreenID=331&DisplayPresenterID=119438&DisplayProgramItemID=110405&DisplayProgramSessionID=40197&Token=HCMTJS4F6&PreviousScreens=326
Thanks for your comment, and while there is much that I disagree with you on, we both can agree that “[physicians] rarely understand that they are in service to the ill and their job is to figure out what is wrong and to treat it. That demands continual education, a sense of humility, and an ability to serve.” I also agree that cognitive bias is a significant problem – many people read the scientific literature and come to different conclusions because of it.
Our disagreements seem to lie in how we weigh and accept evidence. I, too, have read thousands of scientific papers. The question is not how many papers I have read (or you have read), but what distinguishes the quality of one paper from another?
I put high value on studies that are randomized, blinded and with placebo controls. Antibiotics have been repeatedly proven with high quality studies with this study design. The herbal medicine that you promote on your website and in your books may help some patients (I don’t doubt that), but it is difficult for a physician to recommend such herbal treatments broadly until there is more of a high quality evidence base to support it. I get especially concerned when people forgo treatments for which there is high quality evidence and instead turn to treatments for which there is little evidence because someone convinced them it would be better.
I worry that your evidence base is more like Christian Perronne’s, which he describes in his recent book, which I encourage you to read along with a very good review: http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article2875. Like you, he also has interesting theories about diseases, namely the idea that crypto-infections may cause everything from Lyme-like symptoms to autism or alzheimers. You may criticize me for taking him to task, but he marshals little evidence to prove this beyond his anecdotal experience. He claims his theories are valid not because they have been tested and high quality studies have proved them to be so, but because he has seen the results with his own eyes. I don’t care what your credentials are or how many papers you’ve read – if the treatments you’re offering haven’t been studied in high quality trials, I will remain very skeptical of them. Given how many papers you’ve read, I would hope you would too.
This paper is a bullshit !
Chronic Lyme disease is a real problem for patients without results after standard antibiotherapy. Because Borrelia and several co-infections can persist in the organism.
According to GRADE project guidelines in England, the evidences are based on low or very low quality of evidence in all questions formulated by the panel. Yes … LOW or VERY LOW quality ! In this contexte, why the specialists in infectious diseases and other experts can claim we have good science to diagnose and cure this disease ?
For more information about this project, see : https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/indevelopment/gid-ng10007/consultation/html-content-2
The thesis that there is a communication crisis is deeply wrong. These specialists and experts have found a strategy to discredit Doctors who follow chronic patients et their patients themselves.
More and more evidence supports complexity and chronicity, according to this systematic review :
But we have no robust randomized clinical trial who supports this thesis. We need to finance a independant, transparent research to solve uncertainties. It’s a urgent for many patients, abandoned by the classical medicine. You have an physiological problem and the Doctors will diagnose stress, burn-out, somatization or psychiatric problems ! But where is the Hippocratic Oath
Dude is not only not qualified to be talking about Lyme (has no science background) but he went to Yale (the primary perpetrators of the Lyme and LYMErix crime) and the CDC (CDC officers own the useless tick borne disease patents and performed the Dearborn stunt). See more at truthcures.org/charge-sheets or ActionLyme.org for the science and the details.
Thanks for your comment. I hope going to Yale or having worked at the CDC doesn’t disqualify all experts in your eyes — that would be a lot of people! I’m sad to see that much of my biography that you cite is incorrect, and the truth would be easily verifiable by a google search or a glance at my Linked-In profile. Since you’re an analytical chemist, I thought you’d at least approve of my chemistry background?
You do raise an interesting question about who is qualified to be an expert. I believe patients have a unique expertise that should be shared and can help set research priorities, but aren’t necessarily. I spent 14 years in post-graduate education, so I’m also pretty personally invested in the idea that expertise can be gained through more education, but degrees don’t make experts either.
To me, it isn’t necessarily because the facts memorized that gives one expertise, though that is important, but education teaches you a certain process of thinking that helps weigh evidence and avoid bias. Many people I’ve talked to about Lyme can cite a lot of facts or link to lots of papers, but have difficulty identifying bias and motivated reasoning in their own analysis of all the data.
From what I can see, you’re idea of an expert seems to be associated with distance from the “perps” at Yale and the CDC that discuss views different from yours. That seems more like a litmus test of expertise based on pedigree and belief, rather than weighing evidence. Would you like to explain in more detail?
It is disappointing that an article that is about how to do effective risk communication, a 40+ year old unique communication discipline that specifically deals with challenges like this, includes nothing about risk communication per se, nor anything from the several prominent risk communicators whose expertise might have helped this essay more productively answer its central question. Nor does it include anything from the research on risk perception psychology that in addition to Kahan et al helps explain the emotions and fear in this instance.
I’d be interested in learning more about the risk communicators if you were to cite a few, as well as some of the research on risk perception psychology?
I understand what this guy is saying, BUT the husband of our neighbor in France got Lyme disease, and he NEVER got better. He couldn’t stand the years of suffering and eventually committed suicide… Something is obviously wrong!!
I’ve suffered from Lyme disease since childhood (80’s), and I’ve seen numerous doctors and specialists, they have always said I’m making that up, I have nothing. That’s medicine in France! They laugh at you and leave you untreated! 40 years of suffering! I understand why so many suicides!
I see France has their own indoctrinated Lyme War. Good! The French people deserve Truth and Justice as well. Lyme AIDS Victims should get their Science from the Spaniards as well as hundreds of published articles telling the truth of Epsteins Borreliosis AIDS Pandemic. Undark the historical chicanery of Spirochetal Disease. After all infinite antigenic variation is a never-ending foe.
Are you serious to write that ?
Iv been sick for 14 years and I didn’t know what happened.
After dealing two years with antibiotics, I feel like a new man.
Guess what ? It was lyme disease and my test was negative.
Sorry but you have to search a little bit more than your certainty.
Dr Scales at it again… Saddening…
Will you call this quakery?…
Proof that chronic lyme disease exists
Commercial test kits for detection of Lyme borreliosis: a meta-analysis of test accuracy
Drug Combinations against Borrelia burgdorferi Persisters In Vitro: Eradication Achieved by Using Daptomycin, Cefoperazone and Doxycycline
Characterization of Biofilm Formation by Borrelia burgdorferi In Vitro
What do you have to say from the amount of scientific references listed here?
This is not funny, people are dying, you know…
How Lyme disease might be triggering hundreds of suicides
This is a comment that I published in one of your previous articles on a different web site, that was withdrawn:
Dear Dr Scales, although I might have sounded harsh in my words, I stand by what I wrote. These are a few comments:
“which has France’s leading Lyme scientists answering questions about the disease – can you cite your evidence?”
Again, I disagree. A leading scientist needs a critical mindset and only should trust scientific evidence.
Regarding the radio messages, here they are: http://inpes.santepubliquefrance.fr/10000/themes/maladies-tiques/tiques-outils-information.asp however it seems the page was removed, maybe due to patient’s anger through Lyme societies. Here are some points which are wrong in these audio messages:
On “Qu’est-ce-que la maladie de Lyme” (What is Lyme disease)
They say “You get Lyme from a tick bite”
-> You cannot just say that, there are other ways of catching Lyme disease:
Horse-flies, e.g. https://www.arminlabs.com/fr/services/tick-borne-diseases/lyme-borreliosis
Mosquitos, e.g. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877959X15300327
Sand flies, e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3565243/
In utero, e.g:
Dr Horowitz, “How can I get better”, p.89: “Borrelia Burgdorferi may be transmitted transplacentally to the fetus, as may associated co-infections like Borrelia Miyamotoi, Babesia and Bartonella.”
p.91: “Mary came back 6 weeks later, brokenhearted. She had just miscarried. I ordered PCR tests on the fetus and placenta just to be sure that Lyme disease wasn’t involved in the miscarriage. Unfortunately, the results came back positive; Borrelia was found in both the placenta and the fetus. It appeared that Mary was still infected with Lyme disease, despite two years of treatment, which she had passed on to her unborn child.”
p.93:”I have now treated approximately one hundred pregnant women with antibiotics classified as safe for the fetus. We have found that the women with active Lyme symptoms had an easier time during their pregnancy on antibiotics, and the babies were all healthy at birth. A few of the babies were, however, PCR positive for borrelia or mycoplasma in the placenta, cord blood, or amniotic fluid despite maternal therapy”
Sexually, e.g. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/01/prweb11506441.htm
+ the borrelia is a spirochete, and belongs to the same family as treponema pallidum (syphilis)
+ the number of testimonials of couples being both infected despite not having necessarily been exposed to tick bite
From blood, e.g. https://www.cdc.gov/lyme/faq/index.html informs that:
“Scientists have found that the Lyme disease bacteria can live in blood from a person with an active infection that is stored for donation”
And Dr Richard Horowitz, “How Can I Get Better?”, p.123 says: “HGA, due to Anaplasma phagocytophilum, can also be transmitted by a blood transfusion (along with other tick-borne infections like Bartonella and Babesia)”
They say “Inflammation des grosses articulations, des manifestations neurologiques, des douleurs, une fatigabilité” (Inflammation of large joints, neurological problems, pain, fatigability)
Very rough summary…It is not just fatigability, it is chronic fatigue, wide-spread pain, and heavy cognitive impairment (short-term memory and concentration).
They say “La prévention c’est se protéger contre les piqûres de tiques” (Prevention is all about protecting yourself against tick bites)
It is not the only prevention measure…One also has to be careful with infected individuals if aware of the infection (blood contamination, sexual intercourse).
On “Qui sont les personnes les plus exposées ?” (Who are the people at risk?):
The person only discusses exposure to ticks. Nothing is said about other means of transmission. People who discover Lyme disease will think one can get Lyme only from tick bites.
On “Que faire en cas d’une piqûre de tique ?” (What to do in case of a tick bite?):
They say “You slide the tick remover underneath the tick, and pull it up slightly, it is done easily”
No. This is exactly what you do when you don’t know how to use it. If you do that, the tick rostrum stays in the skin. One has to turn the tick remover first, to detach the rostrum from the skin, prior to pulling it up.
On “Les signes de la maladie de Lyme” (Lyme disease symptoms): Cognitive impairment, which is a major symptom, is not mentioned.
They say “Traitement tout à fait simple” (Quite simple treatment)
Come one…How do you think chronic Lyme sick people are going to react? If it were easy to treat, there wouldn’t be so many sick people with positive tests despite antibiotics.
They say “Le plus tôt on le traite, mieux c’est” (The earlier the treatment, the better)
Yes. But this contradicts those notorious “specialists” from the CNR and the CHUs. Many people are left years untreated, but are reported healthy by these “specialists”, despite positive Elispot or PCR. If, according to these “specialists”, chronic Lyme disease is a “fashionable disease”, or in other words, doesn’t exist, then why saying “The earlier the treatment, the better”? I don’t get it…
By “fashionable disease”, I’m just reporting the experience of a lady who went to here doc, and mentioned Lyme disease, after what he told here this is a “fashionable disease”, one more proof of scorn from doctors in France: https://youtu.be/62-co34-LHA?t=876
On “Existe t’il un traitement ?” (Is there a treatment ?)
They say “If you have any questions, ask your family doctor”
This statement is a disaster…If people apply this to the letter, they will go into chronic phase, because of lack of knowledge of family doctors who usually take it lightly, some of them saying ticks are not pathogenic in France. And these new sick people will land onto the patient’s Lyme forum, in dire straits, asking desperately for help, after months or years wandering. This is utterly irresponsible.
“Does the formal letter from the Lyme society you mention have references? Perhaps you could include the link?”
Here’s the link: https://www.facebook.com/ledroitdeguerir/posts/1920774154834959 (you’ll have to click one more time on the link to the PDF file)
“but you do not cite specific studies, so I cannot be certain”
I have many in my bookmarks… Here are a few: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3474945/
Granted some of the sources may have some mistakes, but what is staggering is the amount of studies published by researchers, and doctors (e.g. if you type “Lyme” on PubMed). All of them can’t be wrong. Same when you observe spirochetes in a microscope out of a capillary blood smear at an LLMD’s practice: This can’t be wrong. Or when some patients manage to do a PCR that happens to be positive even years after a tick bite. But there will always be “specialists” entrenched in denial.
“Much of the research cited by Drs. Horowitz and Perronne don’t pass muster. In any field – Lyme or otherwise – generalizing to humans from in vitro or animal studies is bad science and can be dangerous.”
Dr Horowitz, Dr Perronne and many other Lyme doctors emphasize on their years of experience treating effectively many patients. I think this experience should be taken into account and built upon, instead of discarding it with contempt. Same goes with people who say they were finally cured after a long-term treatment given by a Lyme doctor, and living a normal life again. Refusing to investigate and to know the truth is not a scientific approach, but this is the behavior of the so called “specialists” in France. Regarding generalizing to humans from in vitro or animal studies, I don’t recall these 2 aforementioned doctors doing it, but in any case, I agree with you on that. However, when a PCR is forbidden for humans, but is allowed for animals, when you are sick and desperate, I can understand why some of the sick people send their own blood sample to the veterinary lab. They are not the ones to blame. Why forbidding PCRs on specific fluids to humans? Why is ELISA considered more trustworthy than Elispot LTT? This is none sense…Experience shows the opposite. Why isn’t a snapshot of a microscope video showing spirochetes a proof of infection? Do they think it is normal to have spirochetes in capillaries or synovial liquid? Why do doctors think sick people are simulating? What more proofs do they want? This will never end… This is beyond me…
“However, these results can generate hypotheses and more high quality studies for testing in large, randomized trials with placebos, if those studies can be done.”
Those studies will not be done by those so called “specialists”. They dig their heels in. They don’t want to see the huge amount of evidence of chronic Lyme, diagnosis and treatment (scientific literature, books, PubMed, extensive LLMD experience, numerous patient feedback). They don’t want to be wrong, and they have to protect the chronic disease market of the pharmaceutical industry. Otherwise, why so much effort in forbidding the use of PCR and in criticizing the validity of the LTT? They don’t want to truth to come out. That’s an understatement. Remember the pharmaceutical industry’s motto: A patient cured is a client lost.
“For disseminated Lyme, where the bacteria has invaded some other part of the body, the sensitivity of Elisa tests are quite high – above 95% for Lyme arthritis”
Experience of LLMDs show that ELISA is notorious for not being reliable, hence the use of other tests that are more trustworthy. To illustrate, my own case: my ELISA is negative (WB too), but my Elispot is positive (active infection), and my symptoms are present too.
“labeling well-intentioned physicians as “ill-intentioned liars with ominous intentions” who “want to keep patients sick” tends to inflame debate”
Yes, but this is what happens when you’ve spent years trying to convince folks who refuse the evidence, who lecture you with disdain, and send you to psychiatrists who give you antipsychotics. At this point, I don’t expect anything anymore from these people. We also found out that in schools of medicine, they make fun of the lymies here.
To illustrate, the president of one of the leading Lyme societies here stumbled upon a Facebook conversation between two medicine students, after a TV documentary on Lyme. They were saying basically that, given the content of the comments from the lymies on the chat, they were dealing with a psychosis, and they suggested Risperdal: 14 days in phase 1, and 28 days in phase 2. You’ll find the screenshot of their conversation here: https://www.facebook.com/ledroitdeguerir/posts/1902968686615506 – This tells a lot about the mentality of medicine teachers here. Still a long way to go.
“it would be great to have a scientific debate about those points without resorting to ad hominem attacks […] A little empathy can go a long way, on both sides of this debate”
Too late. A group of patients I’m part of is filing a class-action lawsuit against those responsible for our condition: http://www.lymaction.fr/
Hi Aspie Lymie/Calande,
Thanks for your comments, and your comments on the WBUR site. BTW, the WBUR comments system has an automated filter that deletes comments with lots of links on the suspicion that they’re spam, which is why your comment would not stay up. You could find more info on the FAQ from Disqus, the company contracted to run the comments, if you’d like.
On WBUR’s website, we chatted a bit about quality of evidence, and agreed that it mattered. But when you say “what is staggering is the amount of studies published by researchers, and doctors (e.g. if you type “Lyme” on PubMed). All of them can’t be wrong,” I worry that you view the number of papers as giving evidence its strength, rather than the methodology. We agreed on this previously, but many of the studies you link to do not have robust methodology, meaning we have to be very careful drawing conclusions from them. And some of the conclusions you draw as settled fact, for example, about how Lyme can be spread by other insects aside from ticks, are far from certain. (To give an example, studies looking at the possible vector-borne HIV transmission were much much larger than those you cited to be certain there was no transmission.)
Drawing too-concrete conclusions from small, inconclusive studies is one of the reasons why the chasm between . I can see on various forums that many people believe that these poor-quality studies are facts, yet dismiss higher-quality studies that contradict their beliefs. And this epistemic cocoon is concerning because it closes out anyone who doesn’t share those beliefs. Lyme patient advocates complain this exclusion in guideline setting, but I see that on France Lyme’s Francophone forum, where the pages discussing the scientific literature are closed unless one has the appropriate permissions.
Still, I’m sorry to hear about your suffering and the struggles of other patients with chronic illnesses, especially those who struggle to find a diagnosis. I think there’s still a lot that physicians need to learn about treating patients with illnesses that are difficult to diagnose and don’t fit neatly in our diagnostic and treatment guidelines.
Which is why I see the debate about chronic Lyme as a symptom of the larger problem I mention in the piece above: “the true epidemic of “medically unexplained symptoms” — the patients with “none of the above” syndromes that are too frequently dismissed by mainstream physicians for their medically unexplored stories.”
Much of the science on Lyme is still very uncertain, but I hope we can at least agree on that.
“Lyme disease” is a fantasy concocted by Allen Steere in Germany in 1993. It refers to an autoimmune arthritis reaction to OspA, the fake “vaccines.” OspA is a fungal endotoxin that causes global immunosuppression. It is this latter disease that we call “Chronic Lyme.” The reason no one is allowed to have this latter, AIDS-like post-sepsis Lyme is that it was caused by these fake vaccines, too. Look at the timeline. The vaccine trials were underway at least a year before the Dearborn conference where the case definition was changed to exclude the chronic neurologic form of Lyme (AIDS) … because it was caused by injections of this fungal antigen, this fungal endotoxin, the triacyl lipoprotein, OspA, too; SEE THE RICO FILES:
The “controversy” is a lie the main stream press has never been able to report. And here we are, 23 years later (after the Dearborn stunt) and they still cant.
Great to see an exposé of the dangerous Chronic Lyme Cult, which is entrapping many patients into pursuing quackery for fake diseases, possibly leaving real problems untreated.
Definition of quackery:
“Dishonest practices and claims to have special knowledge and skill in some field, typically medicine”
This applies to the groups of doctors Dr Scale met in France: They use dishonest practices and claims to have special knowledge and skills in Lyme disease, while in reality, they don’t know any of the latest scientific research published by Dr Zhang, Dr Sapi, Dr Lewis or Pr McDonald. They leave people untreated. They lie. They cite non-existing literature. They are quacks.
> “Chronic Lyme Cult”
> “fake diseases”
There’s nothing worse than someone saying you have nothing, it’s in your head, you’re making that up. Proof That Chronic Lyme Disease Exists: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2876246/
The “Lyme wars” were started by the ALDF dotcom (with members who were CDC officers, NIH grant office employees and IDSA guidelines authors) when they decided to pursue a monopoly on tick-borne disease vaccines and test kits. Their initial product, LYMErix, was in trials in the early 1990s when they found that the adverse events looked just like “chronic Lyme” AKA neuroborreliosis AKA post-sepsis syndrome AKA tick-bite-post-sepsis AIDS.
If you can’t detect the disease, you can’t detect vaccine failure. So, at the CDC’s 1994 “Dearborn” conference, they changed the disease definition by way of excluding the neurological, immune suppression cases from diagnosis. 23 years later they still say the testing sucks (it’s FRAUDULENT), that the disease is under-reported by 10-12 times, and that they don’t know what these millions of disabled people have, but it’s definitely not Lyme!
We need these criminals prosecuted for homicide for knowingly denying basic human rights–abuses under color of law in addition to scientific fraud, racketeering and ripping off the government via fraudulent grants. ILADS and the major nonprofits perpetuate the “wars” by not dealing with these crimes and only insisting that “chronic Lyme” is a persistent bacterial infection. The real science says it is more like a B cell AIDS.
The man (David Scales) who wrote this article does not have a science background. His undergraduate degree is in sociology, is from Yale and works for the CDC. Not credible on Lyme, that is FOR SURE. These are all the perps (at Yale and the CDC). Yale and the CDC staff who founded the ALDF.com, the central Lyme RICO entity.
The IDSA panel that declared there’s no such thing as chronic Lyme was corrupt and filled with people with serious conflicts of interest. It was seriously down to a 50-50 vote and so they added one more asshole to the panel. The CDC and FDA are a joke and work for big corporations just like most other gov’t agencies (see: revolving door).
It is unfortunate that this article mostly touches on people rejecting science. There is a problem here, and that’s not what it is.
The CDC states that in a small percentage of cases will continue to have lingering symptoms. https://www.cdc.gov/lyme/postlds/index.html
The CDC also states that about 300,000 new cases are reported each year in the U.S., a small percentage could mean 1% or 3,000 new people with Post Lyme Disease Syndrome PLDS every year.
Can lyme disease be chronic? There is no evidence to support either way; however, with 3,000 new people every year that are suffering I think it’s time that the scientific community finds out the answer so these people can get the proper help they need.
It is unfortunate that in this entire article the only rational discussion of science is from Cheo Codda. It would seem obvious that a disease that is well known to have repercussions for the immune system, will in some percentage of cases set off auto-immune responses that, as is in general true of many auto-immune diseases, are long lasting. The fact that such auto-immune responses may be related to as yet unrecognized genetically controlled variants of immune system regulators, which may be set off by other pathways than Lymes, should also be obvious.
> “Can lyme disease be chronic? There is no evidence to support either way”
Yes, there is: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2876246/
Comments are closed.