Chronic lyme disease is the controversial disease where no pathogen can be found anymore, yet the most classical "treatment" offered by some practicians (but no

Chronic lyme disease is the controversial disease where no pathogen can be found anymore, yet the most classical "treatment" offered by some practicians (but not all) is months or years of antibiotics. It's a dramatic misuse of antibiotics, because you're probably not without knowing that resistances emerge from their use, and it has no efficiency. Two recent free access reviews summing up the issue. Tldr : the very unspecific symptoms are probably real (but not always ie cognitive dysfunction complain that test up normal for age range), probably not because of borreliosis though (since follow up of people who had acute lyme disease brings up a very low number of chronic affection), patients feel unlistened to (sadly always more common and ends up in such defiance towards modern medicine and resort to shady unproven sicknesses and their communities, see electrosensibility too in the same vein), antibiotics are useless. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4440423/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4440423/ Extract : As such, treatment of this symptom complex with antibiotics is unlikely to be helpful to patients but does incur substantial risk. This, combined with the impact of excessive antibiotic usage on the development of widespread antibiotic resistance among more potentially lethal pathogens, and the significant health care resource utilization and cost associated with prolonged administration of parenteral antibiotics, makes such treatment ill advised. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4477530/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4477530/ Extract : Three research groups have examined prospectively the effectiveness of prolonged antibiotic courses for post-Lyme disease syndromes.57–59,75 All trials had strict entrance criteria similar to the aforementioned definition of PLDS. The Klempner and colleagues58 study reported 2 parallel trials in which their cohort of 129 subjects was divided into seropositive (n = 78) and seronegative (n = 51) arms. Subjects randomized to treatment groups received 30 days of intravenous (IV) ceftriaxone followed by 60 days of oral doxycycline. Those randomized to the placebo arm received IV placebo for 30 days, followed by an oral placebo for 60 days. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life as assessed by standardized instruments (the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form General Health Survey [SF-36] and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire). These instruments were administered at baseline, and then 30, 90, and 180 days. There was no difference in any outcome measure between placebo and treatment groups in either the seropositive or seronegative arm, or in a detailed battery of neuropsychological tests that was published subsequently.75 Although all patients had complained of cognitive dysfunction at baseline (and this was the primary complaint in >70%), objective measures of cognitive function, such as memory and attention, were normal compared with age-referenced normative data. Depression, anxiety, and somatic complaints improved in both the antibiotic and placebo arms groups between baseline and day 180.