![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 9 of 9. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2009, at 21:26:08
Since I did have spinal fluid taps for lymes found this interesting in the University website. Phillipa
Category: Lyme testing (blood, spinal fluid...)
Can you have Lyme disease without any symptoms? I had blood work that showed I have Lyme but I don't have any symptoms.
If a person doesn't have signs or symptoms of Lyme disease, then the person does not have Lyme disease as the definition of disease requires symptoms. A blood test may be positive for several reasons. First, the positive test may indicate that the person was infected previously by the agent of Lyme disease and the immune system mounted a successful attack which resulted in the long-term production of antibodies against the agent of Lyme disease. That's why tests can stay positive for months to years, even when active infection is no longer present. We expect, however, that over time the ELISA titer should decrease in magnitude. Second, a positive test may also indicate that there is a small amount of persistent infection that is continuing to partially stimulate the immune system. The residual organism may not be biologically active; i.e., it might be in a latent or dormant state and thus not causing any disease symptoms. In this case, the ELISA titer may stay elevated for long periods without a gradual decline. Third, a positive test may be a false positive, especially if the positive test is only an ELISA. It is well known for example that concurrent viral infections (such as Epstein-Barr) may result in a false positive Lyme ELISA. If the positive test is an IgG Western blot or a C6 Lyme ELISA, it is very unlikely that either test would be falsely positive. Fourth, a positive test may indicate that you did have some of the signs or symptoms of Lyme disease in the past but didn't recognize the problem as Lyme disease. You may have then been treated with antibiotics for another reason and this may have led to a resolution of the Lyme disease without your awareness of ever having had Lyme disease.
Posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 11:53:33
In reply to From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease., posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2009, at 21:26:08
Reason posted is that I've gotten so many babblemails with concerned people thinking they might have lymes thought this might be reasurring that they don't or if did another illness that required an antibiotic may have eliminated it. Phillipa
Posted by floatingbridge on July 20, 2009, at 13:57:28
In reply to Re: From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease., posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 11:53:33
Thanks, Phillipa!
Posted by bleauberry on July 20, 2009, at 18:08:46
In reply to From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease., posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2009, at 21:26:08
This report is chock full of things like
"we expect"
"may"
"should"Anyone can hypothesize and theorize, as this newsletter does. I can come up with my own as good or better than the ones in this newsletter.
In truth, Lyme is so complicating and mysterious that it is even a considerable challenge for a specialized Lyme expert physiciasn to get a grasp on it from one patient to the next. It takes a keen eye and years of experience.
The ELISA test is practically useless, as is the spinal tap. Among clinicians well schooled in Lyme, the only test with any meaning at all is the Western Blot. Even it has many flaws. Lyme is a clinical diagnosis, not a lab diagnosis.
If someone has Lyme but no symptoms, cool. It happens. One of the mysteries of Lyme. The serious and much more frequent problem is quite the opposite. That is, people with symptoms who don't know they have Lyme and only took the ELISA test from a physician with only average basic training in Lyme. That spells misery for that patient's future. The Centers For Disease Control estimates that there are 9 such people right now for every one that has already been diagnosed.
Posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 20:25:38
In reply to Re: From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease., posted by bleauberry on July 20, 2009, at 18:08:46
Seriously the whole world doesn't have an infection as I don't did don't anymore. Are you now well from the antibiotics and off all psych meds? Don't you have a long history of psych med use? Prior to the rash? Just asking as curious. Thanks Phillipa
Posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 20:31:53
In reply to Re: From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease. » bleauberry, posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 20:25:38
BB how come the Center Of Disease Control will not recommend long term antibiotic treatment? Guess I was Lucky got two years of it. I don't know I think the orignal article was posted a while back by was it SLS? If not please correct me thanks. Phillipa ps someone posted it as that is how I found it and saved it.
Posted by Phillipa on July 21, 2009, at 0:16:41
In reply to Re: From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease., posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 20:31:53
CDC link one of many Phillipa
http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/topics/lymeDisease/understanding/chronic.htm
Posted by bleauberry on July 21, 2009, at 5:22:38
In reply to Re: From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease., posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2009, at 20:31:53
> BB how come the Center Of Disease Control will not recommend long term antibiotic treatment? Guess I was Lucky got two years of it. I don't know I think the orignal article was posted a while back by was it SLS? If not please correct me thanks. Phillipa ps someone posted it as that is how I found it and saved it.
The Centers For Disease Control is not in the clinical healing business. They are in the surveilance business. Their recommendations for treatment were the best that was known at the time. But as you know, in any large beauracracy trying to adjust or change things is like trying to move a boulder. It is slow with a lot of resistance.
Several hundred physicians and thousands of patients however are not in the surveilance business. They are in the business of getting well, which most often in the real world happens outside of the CDC outdated recommendations. Science has come a long way.
But more importantly, "clinical evidence is rapidly over-ruling academic evidence" as doctors discover what works and what doesn't with their patients. CDC doesn't treat patients and has no experience with actual sick people. The doctors on the front lines do.
CDC is not a bible. It is a guideline. They provide surveilance of disease. They are not in the healing business. Unfortunately the association of Infectious Disease Specialists have adopted the CDC guidelines as a bible, and that probably accounts for why so many people who sought treatment from them had poor or inadequate outcomes.
I answered the rest of your questions in my previous post. Go back and take another look at that if it helps.
Posted by Phillipa on July 21, 2009, at 12:44:50
In reply to Re: From Columbia Newsletter on Lymes Disease. » Phillipa, posted by bleauberry on July 21, 2009, at 5:22:38
BB hope you got my babblemail. Explains a lot. You know you're a sweetie and I hope we're trying to find answers for us all. The more info we post the more interest and then hopefully more people google. I'm not disagreeing with you only posting what's out there okay? Love ya Phillipa
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.