HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

New Yorker article

Support Forums
>
Lyme Disease
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 6/26/2013 4:42 PM (GMT 0)
A couple friends have already forwarded this to me.

Seems like a lot more people will be learning a bit about Lyme...

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/07/01/130701fa_fact_specter?currentPage=all
Posted 6/26/2013 5:39 PM (GMT 0)
Michael Specter's interview on NPR is very damaging to people with LD. Very disappointed. He seems like nothing more than a mouthpiece for the IDSA.
Posted 6/26/2013 6:12 PM (GMT 0)
Oh no, that's so unfortunate!

Some of the article was upsetting to read... Basically when he explains the perspective of those to don't believe in chronic lyme. I think it's just so hard to even read their quotes!

But I thought Specter did a decent job of impartially explaining both sides of the debate... And it seemed like he absolutely advocated for more research.. I took this to mean his intention in writing was to bring the lyme issue to people's attention so that more would be done to help those with lyme. I sort of thought he explained both sides of the debate so impartially so that everyone would take the article really seriously.

Hmmm... Maybe I'm being overly optimistic.
Posted 6/26/2013 7:02 PM (GMT 0)
Marigold,
I thought the same thing when I read the article, but the NPR interview is completely different. He says there's no scientific evidence of chronic Lyme and he doesn't think that long term antibiotics help.
Posted 6/26/2013 9:57 PM (GMT 0)
OH that's so disappointing! It's sad to think of people, including friends and family, learning everything they'll know about lyme disease from it :(
Posted 6/26/2013 10:55 PM (GMT 0)
That's how I feel too. It makes people now think that they know about an issue.
Posted 6/27/2013 7:29 PM (GMT 0)
Thank you Marigold for posting this link. I appreciate it when people share information they find. I have read about half of it. The writer appears to be taking an objective stance which is good. Of course, some of what is written is tainted by IDSA and mainstream medicine's views, but that is too be expected. I agree that getting the Lyme debate out there is a good thing. It makes me people think and question. The author brings up both sides of the controversy over Lyme, and I for one, appreciate that. I hope I am not speaking too soon since I haven't finished the article. (:
Posted 6/27/2013 8:16 PM (GMT 0)
You're very welcome. It's interesting... 3 friends have already forwarded to me the article and/or link to the NPR interview. I think a lot of people are seeing them.

Cat, I had the same reaction to the article. Even though it's always hard to read the opinions of those who don't believe in chronic lyme, I appreciated an objective stance on the debate.

The interview, somehow, has a very different tone. Man, I listened to the first 20 minutes and I couldn't take any more of it! He got so many facts just plain wrong! And he said folks who get better by using unrecommended "alternative" approaches believe in "magic" and attributed it to the placebo effect. Said some people do feel better but there's no "science" to back it up.

I just think it's so unfortunate that the person NPR interviews as a lyme expert is a science WRITER who has been looking into Lyme for 3 WEEKS!!! And so many people are going to learn all they know about Lyme from this.
Posted 6/28/2013 8:27 PM (GMT 0)
I must be missing something. What interview is that? I finished reading the article and the only section that angered me was the reference to people fostering "dark conspiracies." Our optometrist just told my husband yesterday that he has a optometrist friend who was diagnosed with ALS and found out he had Lyme. He didn't get his name but I want to talk to him and find out what he is doing about it. He has to realize what we know. We need more people in the medical field to see what's going on and do something to change things around. Why wouldn't people think there are conspiracies when the issues of Lyme/coinfections are not addressed properly?
Posted 6/28/2013 9:18 PM (GMT 0)
I think it's a good article on a very heated topic.
Posted 6/29/2013 12:04 AM (GMT 0)
Here's a link to the article:
www.wbur.org/npr/195223507/the-lyme-wars-that-tiny-ticks-have-wrought
Posted 6/29/2013 4:32 PM (GMT 0)
Michael Specter wrote the article "The Lyme Wars" for the New Yorker. It's a decent article... He presents both sides of the controversy. Then Terry Gross interviewed him for Fresh Air on NPR. The interview felt very different to me... LOTS of misinformation, bias, complete dismissiveness of alternative approaches to Lyme as unscientific, suggestion that Lyme shouldn't be diagnosed clinically. I found it very upsetting.. Especially because so many of my friends listened to it and think they're educated about lye now.

interview: http://www.npr.org/2013/06/26/195223507/the-lyme-wars-that-tiny-ticks-have-wrought?ft=1&f=13&sc=17
Posted 7/1/2013 9:13 PM (GMT 0)
Thats' too bad. I don't think I would want to hear it; it would get my blood boiling.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply