Why won't the IDSA simply explain to the public what is causing what some patients call Chronic Lyme Disease and some call Post-Lyme Syndrome? Don't they know? If they don't, and it is just speculation, then numerous hypotheses belong on the table.
Why do some of the IDSA's own members use the term "Chronic Lyme Disease" in their papers and on their own patents - including a patent as recently as 2005 - if Chronic Lyme Disease does not exist?
Why have some of the IDSA's own members made statements about the persistence of Borrelia and its chronic nature in their own research publications - but when asked today deny Borrelia persists and can be chronic?
If there was a shift in opinion from these IDSA members from a persistence model to an autoimmune model explaining why Chronic Lyme Disease occurs, what was the research or pivotal event which led to that shift?
Why do Chronic Lyme Disease patients who go to other doctors to ensure they are not missing any additional diagnoses often fail to find any other cause for their symptoms?
If Chronic Lyme Disease is (as some IDSA doctors and others have suggested without any scientific proof given) a psychological condition, why is it that the medications used to treat such conditions are ineffective in eliminating the symptoms in Chronic Lyme Disease patients when tried?
If, as it is claimed, months of antibiotics did not help the patients in trials who have Chronic Lyme Disease - is it possible that the issue isn't that the patient must not have Chronic Lyme Disease - but instead the wrong antibiotic treatment was used during the trials?
Is it possible that due to antigenic variation and sequestration of Borrelia bacteria, it can evade antibiotics successfully, and that their slow reproduction cycle can require a longer treatment cycle in order to kill all the bacteria?
Can spirochetes found in tissues and collagen after antibiotic treatment cause symptoms based on infection even if those spirochetes are found to be non-dividing? Dr. Stephen Barthold states they are still infectious.
How do the mouse infectivity tests apply to human beings?
What does the IDSA think of this research by UC Davis showing persistence of Bb?
What does the IDSA think of this research on neuroborreliosis positive patients with negative cultures?
What percentage of Lyme Disease patients go on to develop neuroborreliosis? Consider that question carefully, in light of the publication just linked.
If even just asking these questions are considered the mark of ignorance in the public and Chronic Lyme Disease patients, why doesn't the IDSA educate those who have these questions rather than offer tautological sound bites about their opinion?
Because so far, few of these patients are satisfied with the response of IDSA members who wrote the guidelines for Lyme Disease. So far, all the IDSA has said in recent public statements and responses is that in their professional opinion, Lyme Disease is not chronic.
And they want to know more about their opinion beyond the four trials that detractors keep citing repeatedly - especially when recent research leads to more questions about Chronic Lyme Disease.
This work by Camp Other is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.