Posted 3/15/2014 4:42 PM (GMT 0)
"The accuracy of testing in Lyme has been repeatedly documented to be
poor, especially so in early disease, and in late disease. An article
by Stricker and Johnson in the British Medical Journal reports the
overall sensitivity (ability to pick up cases of Lyme) of the
recommended testing scheme as reported in the literature is about 56%.
The specificity (certainty that a positive case is indeed a case) is
very high 98%. The inconsistencies from lab to lab has been documented
repeatedly. This is why the CDC has said over and over that the
surveillance criteria should NOT be used as clinical criteria for
diagnosis. It is well documented from the earliest of studies that
using western blot testing there is about a 20% incidence of negative
tests in definite cases of Lyme disease. I do agree with "BLANK"
that it is a big mistake not to think of Lyme disease. Second point of
clarification: if we wait in medicine for double blind placebo
controlled trials to prove particular interventions before we treat
any conditions, we will not be treating many people. Rather, we should
treat individual patients as individuals, using the best science
available and working with them to make the best decisions we can for
restoring their health. The degrees medical providers have earned are
designed to give us the tools to do just that. Sick patients now
cannot afford to wait for all of the details to be worked out before
we try to help them. Besides, those trials are often so specific as to
make their generalizability to the greater population quite limited.
One person at a time, each person's care specific to that person's
situation. It is what each of us expects from our health care
provider. Yes, the research needs to be done. People who are sick now
cannot wait."
Edited for anonymity