The Controversy

Hi Gfields,

Without even reading past the first sentence, I can tell you that the first article is very incredibly biased against those with Lyme disease. The article that he references in that first sentence states as it's first sentence, "How can you tell whether a doctor has screwed up? You use other doctors as a measuring stick. That’s why our tort law defines medical malpractice as an act that “deviates from accepted norms of practice in the medical community.” "

I won't go on from there, because I could easily tear that article down, point by point - but let's suffice it to say, they didn't care to do their homework on this set of infections. Who has? ILADS. And they train their doctors so that they give effective treatments, which is why we recommend seeing an ILADS trained LLMD, and not one that has adopted that term to describe themselves.

Those people that write those types of articles are everywhere, as it's much easier to sling mud when you don't know the facts. They are the ones with their heads stuck in the ground, hiding from the reality - maybe because the reality scares the pants off of them - and it should. The incidence of these infections is growing substantially every single year. The CDC admits to 300,000 NEW cases each year. That number only represents those that have solid, fully CDC positive tests - not the hundreds (or more!!) that either aren't tested, or have chronic infections and can't get a positive test. So imagine the number more around a minimum of 500,000 or more each year being infected or finding out they have chronic Lyme.


You said, "The scientific reporting on lyme disease seems questionable to me. Also, the scientific organizations who performed the testing seem to have ulterior motives, and therefore are coming up with skewed results. Why don't we just fund our own study with a team of unbiased scientists chosen and reviewed by a panel who ensure that the team is unbiased. We'd also need to make sure that the abx used are standard drugs used for treatment. Maybe get someone like Dr. Horowitz to oversee the study."

We already have a group like that. They are called the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS) and great doctors like Dr. Horowitz are a part of that group.


Why don't you check out these links to see if it doesn't help clear up the confusion:

ILADS vs IDSA:
www.clinicaladvisor.com/controversy-continues-to-fuel-the-lyme-war/article/117160/

archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=226373

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2901226/

With that being said, I am still trying to decide whether the IDSA are the "good guys" or the "bad guys" or something in between. I was reading this article where it makes IDSA sound questionable:

https://www.lymedisease.org/leigner-nyc-lyme-rally-2/

Got it. Thanks man.

So IDSA/CDC are bed partners, so to speak.

ILADS is on our side.

Sorry, brain aint what it used to be. Started on flagyl and doxy and herbals. Herxing pretty good.

I've been taking Cowdens and Jernigans brain detox herbals, drinking lemon water and taking a daily epsom salt bath. I also bought some detox tea.

I think the herbals really do help with the herxing and the detox.

I'm just angry that the gov't is meddling in our pursuit of health. They always seem to be meddling where they don't belong. Before I realized I had Lyme disease, I thought I had something called Post Finasteride Syndrome which you get from a drug called finasteride for hair loss (for men). There are a lot of guys suffering with this too. Thousands. And, again, it's the gov't and big pharma who enable the misery for those guys by supporting a drug that is hurting people.

Also, I really dislike the current director of the CDC. I totally disagree with how he and our president dealt with the ebola outbreak a couple years ago. I'm again infuriated with how they're dealing with Lyme. It would be nice if the gov't stayed out of our business.