4 ms·

I'd encourage anyone interested to do their own research. The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article. There are lot of myt

I'd encourage anyone interested to do their own research. The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article. There are lot of myths around Lyme disease. https://eu.delawareonline.com/story/sponsor-story/nemours/2018/05/01/debunking-myths-surrounding-lyme-disease/532264002/ https://eu.delawareonline.com/story/sponsor-story/nemours/20... Myth #5: Lyme disease can have debilitating, lifelong effects. Fact: When treated with antibiotics, Lyme disease, at any stage of presentation, is curable. Myth #6: My child will be at risk for chronic Lyme disease once he’s infected with Lyme. Fact: Although some people report lingering or recurrent symptoms after Lyme disease, there is no evidence that chronic Lyme disease exists. Prolonged courses of antibiotics are not needed and can do more harm than good. Follow the recommendations of trusted sources such as the Centers for Disease Control and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society. Myth #7: Alternative therapies are valuable treatment options for my child’s Lyme disease infection. Fact: Lyme disease is a hot topic on the internet with many people sharing both successes and horror stories about alternative treatments, but keep in mind that it is hard to verify the legitimacy of internet sources. Instead, talk to your child’s pediatrician, or consult with a pediatric infectious diseases physician at an academic medical center.

akyu 5y ago
>The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article. Simply saying this doesn't make it true. This is not true and that Wikipedia article is outdated.
- yodsanklai 5y ago
  Just like saying it's not true doesn't make it untrue. Which is why I'd encourage everybody to do their own research, and at least know that there are a lot of controversies around this topic.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    Please do YOUR research and read the paper that went thru peer review and was published. once YOU read that paper, please post YOUR peer review summary here. enough with appeals to authority. wikipedia is not even an authoritative source to begin with.
    - freshpots 5y ago
      Are you also a big fan of the scam Dr. Sponaugle and the multitude of forums about chronic Lyme, and consider those charlatans scammers the truth? https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7jk9q/rick-sponaugle-pots-chronic-lyme-sponaugle-wellness-center https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7jk9q/rick-sponaugle-pots-c... Edit: Is Lyme-literate another term you and your internet friends use? Look at the case against him: https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/HealthCareProviders/LicenseVerification?LicInd=37362&ProCde=1501 https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/Healt... Scam Dr's like this are causing the FUD you are spreading.
      - inter_netuser 5y ago
        Take a look here: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/628045/fneur-12-628045-HTML/image_m/fneur-12-628045-g007.jpg https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/628045/fneur-12-6... These are spirochetes in the brain/spine of a dead patient. She had proven lyme diagnosis in the past, has been given the standard treatment and had good response(!), only to relapse, never recover and went on to develop neurological issues years later, and died. The brain was donated and autopsied. Full study: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.628045/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280... Are you saying the lead scientist on this paper, from the Tulane National Primate Research Center is a scammer? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulane_National_Primate_Research_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulane_National_Primate_Resear...) Seems like a big accusation.
        DetroitThrow 5y ago
        I had recently read a paper by a professor in Stanford Psychiatry that made very exaggerated claims that would go on to not be replicated to the degree originally made, which I had expected as the treatment used was not a major improvement on the existing methods and that researchers from even prestigious universities might be incentivized to not investigate or report the full truth if they might benefit from it in some way. While it's interesting that the treatment was "successful" and that symptoms continued, this isn't really a strong statement of support for something like Chronic Lyme Disease or at least its widespread presentation - much more likely a statement of support for Lyme Disease bacteria not always being treated by the regimen, or potentially even that it's easy for someone to get a second infection and have no significant immunity.
- giantg2 5y ago
  I think even the article makes a mention that there is not scientific consensus on many aspects of Lyme disease. It seems it is one of many topics that have studies that may contradict other studies, or explore additional angles.
  - DetroitThrow 5y ago
    The article seems to indicate that consensus does not support Chronic Lyme Disease, instead preferring Post Treatment Lyme Disease as a pathology (which doesn't seem unlikely if the disease causes nervous system damage). It also mentions reinfection has been recorded. I'm only really seeing one data point being posted to counter that idea, and that doesn't seem to exclude the reinfection scenario. I guess the hope for promoters of CLD would be that it's possible to treat the currently irreversible PTLD symptoms using antibiotics, rather than accept something akin to a fibromyalgia diagnosis.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      Ah, I didn't see that this was strictly a comment about chronic Lyme. It seems pretty well settled, but that single conflicting case does leave the door open for further study, even if only to determine how a fluke happened.
coding123 5y ago
Yeah did you read his links? https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.628045/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280... Pretty damning.
darkerside 5y ago
Garbage misinformation. Myth #5: Lyme disease can have debilitating, lifelong effects. Fact: When treated with antibiotics, Lyme disease, at any stage of presentation, is curable. The fact provided in response assumes that people are getting antibiotic treatment, which is not always the case. If you go untreated, then you can have lifelong debilitating effects. I don't think even the author of the article would dispute that. So why is the author using weaselly arguments to imply that you can't? Seems like an attempt to confirm a biased judgement.
garyrob 5y ago
I know where you're coming from. I believe it is the appropriate attitude in discussing misinformation with, for example, covid. BUT I really did do my own research with respect to Lyme, reading deeply into the peer-reviewed literature, and I came to the conclusion that the "scientific consensus" was formed by people too lazy or misguided to read it themselves. For example, the consensus was that Lyme couldn't persist in humans after antibiotic treatment. But it DOES persist in other animals including primates. They could easily discover that because they could euthanize those other animals to see if it was there in their tissues, and it was. They couldn't do that with humans. The conclusion is OBVIOUSLY not that it can't happen in humans, but rather that we haven't proved it could. The "scientific consensus" got those outcomes confused, and assumed it couldn't. But consider this quote from the OP article: "In May, her research team published their strongest evidence to date of persistent Lyme symptoms. In a unique finding, they discovered Lyme bacteria in the tissues of a deceased 69-year-old woman who contracted the disease, was treated multiple times with antibiotics, and still couldn’t clear the infection from her body.” I was impressed by related evidence a couple years ago, such as an examination of the brains of people who had died of Alzheimer's. I don't remember the exact number, but something like 25% of those brains contained Lyme spirochetes. Note that there is a theory gaining traction recently that Alzheimer's is caused by the brain's attempts to manage active infections. There is much, much more to say, and a LOT of research that goes in the opposite direction of what you're assuming in your post. An anecdote: researchers tested hundreds of FDA-approved drugs in test tubes to see which ones worked best at killing Lyme spirochetes. Disulfiram won. My wife, who had lost her career as a retinal surgeon and researcher due to a chronic illness we thought might be chronic Lyme, took disulfiram under the care of her doctor who had treated Lyme patients for decades, and who was one of the first to try disulfiram in patients. After the treatment, her illness disappeared. Our older son also had the same illness, which led to him taking a year off from school because he just couldn't function. He had been taking antibiotics for a couple years. At one point we stopped the antibiotics, and he felt great for a week, worse the next week, and in week 3 he was all the way back to being pretty nonfunctional with the symptoms attributed to "chronic Lyme". He, too, took disulfiram and was cured. Note that we had long spent summers on Little Deer Isle, Maine, known for its deer and deer ticks.
- Quinner 5y ago

akyu 5y ago

>The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article. Simply saying this doesn't make it true. This is not true and that Wikipedia article is outdated.

yodsanklai 5y ago
Just like saying it's not true doesn't make it untrue. Which is why I'd encourage everybody to do their own research, and at least know that there are a lot of controversies around this topic.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  Please do YOUR research and read the paper that went thru peer review and was published. once YOU read that paper, please post YOUR peer review summary here. enough with appeals to authority. wikipedia is not even an authoritative source to begin with.
  - freshpots 5y ago
    Are you also a big fan of the scam Dr. Sponaugle and the multitude of forums about chronic Lyme, and consider those charlatans scammers the truth? https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7jk9q/rick-sponaugle-pots-chronic-lyme-sponaugle-wellness-center https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7jk9q/rick-sponaugle-pots-c... Edit: Is Lyme-literate another term you and your internet friends use? Look at the case against him: https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/HealthCareProviders/LicenseVerification?LicInd=37362&ProCde=1501 https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/Healt... Scam Dr's like this are causing the FUD you are spreading.
    - inter_netuser 5y ago
      Take a look here: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/628045/fneur-12-628045-HTML/image_m/fneur-12-628045-g007.jpg https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/628045/fneur-12-6... These are spirochetes in the brain/spine of a dead patient. She had proven lyme diagnosis in the past, has been given the standard treatment and had good response(!), only to relapse, never recover and went on to develop neurological issues years later, and died. The brain was donated and autopsied. Full study: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.628045/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280... Are you saying the lead scientist on this paper, from the Tulane National Primate Research Center is a scammer? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulane_National_Primate_Research_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulane_National_Primate_Resear...) Seems like a big accusation.
      - DetroitThrow 5y ago
        I had recently read a paper by a professor in Stanford Psychiatry that made very exaggerated claims that would go on to not be replicated to the degree originally made, which I had expected as the treatment used was not a major improvement on the existing methods and that researchers from even prestigious universities might be incentivized to not investigate or report the full truth if they might benefit from it in some way. While it's interesting that the treatment was "successful" and that symptoms continued, this isn't really a strong statement of support for something like Chronic Lyme Disease or at least its widespread presentation - much more likely a statement of support for Lyme Disease bacteria not always being treated by the regimen, or potentially even that it's easy for someone to get a second infection and have no significant immunity.
giantg2 5y ago
I think even the article makes a mention that there is not scientific consensus on many aspects of Lyme disease. It seems it is one of many topics that have studies that may contradict other studies, or explore additional angles.
- DetroitThrow 5y ago
  The article seems to indicate that consensus does not support Chronic Lyme Disease, instead preferring Post Treatment Lyme Disease as a pathology (which doesn't seem unlikely if the disease causes nervous system damage). It also mentions reinfection has been recorded. I'm only really seeing one data point being posted to counter that idea, and that doesn't seem to exclude the reinfection scenario. I guess the hope for promoters of CLD would be that it's possible to treat the currently irreversible PTLD symptoms using antibiotics, rather than accept something akin to a fibromyalgia diagnosis.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Ah, I didn't see that this was strictly a comment about chronic Lyme. It seems pretty well settled, but that single conflicting case does leave the door open for further study, even if only to determine how a fluke happened.

coding123 5y ago

Yeah did you read his links? https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.628045/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280... Pretty damning.

darkerside 5y ago

Garbage misinformation. Myth #5: Lyme disease can have debilitating, lifelong effects. Fact: When treated with antibiotics, Lyme disease, at any stage of presentation, is curable. The fact provided in response assumes that people are getting antibiotic treatment, which is not always the case. If you go untreated, then you can have lifelong debilitating effects. I don't think even the author of the article would dispute that. So why is the author using weaselly arguments to imply that you can't? Seems like an attempt to confirm a biased judgement.

garyrob 5y ago

I know where you're coming from. I believe it is the appropriate attitude in discussing misinformation with, for example, covid. BUT I really did do my own research with respect to Lyme, reading deeply into the peer-reviewed literature, and I came to the conclusion that the "scientific consensus" was formed by people too lazy or misguided to read it themselves. For example, the consensus was that Lyme couldn't persist in humans after antibiotic treatment. But it DOES persist in other animals including primates. They could easily discover that because they could euthanize those other animals to see if it was there in their tissues, and it was. They couldn't do that with humans. The conclusion is OBVIOUSLY not that it can't happen in humans, but rather that we haven't proved it could. The "scientific consensus" got those outcomes confused, and assumed it couldn't. But consider this quote from the OP article: "In May, her research team published their strongest evidence to date of persistent Lyme symptoms. In a unique finding, they discovered Lyme bacteria in the tissues of a deceased 69-year-old woman who contracted the disease, was treated multiple times with antibiotics, and still couldn’t clear the infection from her body.” I was impressed by related evidence a couple years ago, such as an examination of the brains of people who had died of Alzheimer's. I don't remember the exact number, but something like 25% of those brains contained Lyme spirochetes. Note that there is a theory gaining traction recently that Alzheimer's is caused by the brain's attempts to manage active infections. There is much, much more to say, and a LOT of research that goes in the opposite direction of what you're assuming in your post. An anecdote: researchers tested hundreds of FDA-approved drugs in test tubes to see which ones worked best at killing Lyme spirochetes. Disulfiram won. My wife, who had lost her career as a retinal surgeon and researcher due to a chronic illness we thought might be chronic Lyme, took disulfiram under the care of her doctor who had treated Lyme patients for decades, and who was one of the first to try disulfiram in patients. After the treatment, her illness disappeared. Our older son also had the same illness, which led to him taking a year off from school because he just couldn't function. He had been taking antibiotics for a couple years. At one point we stopped the antibiotics, and he felt great for a week, worse the next week, and in week 3 he was all the way back to being pretty nonfunctional with the symptoms attributed to "chronic Lyme". He, too, took disulfiram and was cured. Note that we had long spent summers on Little Deer Isle, Maine, known for its deer and deer ticks.

Quinner 5y ago