All the research I've been doing has become a blur now-- leaving me with the same burning and unanswered question: How long is too long?
In other words: Starting from day one (the tick bite itself) of being infected with Lyme B. (no co-infections) how long, how many months or years of infection does it take-- if you are undiagnosed and untreated with abx--- for the disease to:
A. Become harder to treat?
B. Run the risk of becomming chronic?
C. Become likely to recurr after seemingly successful treatment with abx?
These are probably 'kettle of fish' questions, the answers being individual to each infected person and their eventual treatment protocol.
But it does seem plausible that there would be a time frame of some sort-- a cut off point where an infected, untreated person either still stands a very good chance of recovering......
......or has unfortunately reached the danger zone where a longer more complex 'fight' against the disease is surely going to be the case.
Using myself as an example, I ESTIMATE (given the onset of symptoms) that I was infected a year ago and took no antibiotics during that year.
So....where do I now 'stand' in the ZONE of success or failure at beating Lyme that was untreated for 12 months?
I just thought I'd throw this time frame thing out to the members in order to gather opinions, anecdotal findings, research estimates or facts -- whatever the case may be.
And I really wish it were as simple as having my doctor tell me that if I've had Lyme for a year, then I MUST take_____kind of ABX for _____amount of months and at ____mg. dosage, in order to have the optimum chance of recovery.
Perhaps only the spirochetes know that answer to that exact formula!