What Has The IDSA Done For Patients?

Several studies, both in vivo and in vitro, spanning over the past few decades have definitively shown the persistence of  Lyme spirochetes despite antibiotic challenge.  This should warrant some attention considering that the IDSA maintains that short durations of antibiotics effectively treat Lyme Disease.  Patients that remain ill following the CDC/IDSA treatment protocol are said to be suffering from Post Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome (PTLDS).  What is this exactly?  No one knows, not even the IDSA who coined this term.  The CDC states that the cause of PTLDS is "UNKNOWN".   It could be an autoimmune type reaction similar to what is seen in other infectious diseases or could be from the persistence of Lyme spirochetes.  However, the IDSA maintains that there is no credible evidence that patients who remain ill are suffering from persistent infection.

I want to play devil's advocate for a moment even though there is plenty of scientific proof that patients do suffer from persistent infection with Lyme spirochetes.  If there is any truth to this "autoimmune" like effect following Lyme disease where is the research?  Take a stroll on pubmed or google scholar and type in Post Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome and see what you come up with.  There is not much and it reiterates everything you can find on the IDSA or CDC websites.  So even though these organization acknowledge that a certain percentage of patients remain ill following their recommended treatment for Lyme disease they have done nothing to figure out why.  NOTHING.  Most of the studies you will find online from IDSA proponents are studies that refute any research that contradicts their recommendations.  Why are they always on the defensive?  Why are they not championing new research to bring these ill patients relief?  I'll let you fill in that blank.

At the other end of the spectrum you have ILADS that suggested these ill patients are still fighting an active infection or what is known as Chronic Lyme.  So what have proponents of this theory done for patients?  Well a lot.  They continue to treat patients with antibiotics for as long as necessary.  They have developed novel treatment approaches to address all three form of the Lyme spirochete (cyst, biofilm, and L-forms).  They have discovered new bio-markers to aid in the differential diagnosis of Lyme such as SPECT scans, NK CD57, High levels of active Vitamin D, C4a, and many more.  They discovered alternative and adjunctive treatments such as samento, banderol, cats claw, teasel root, CoQ10, Hyperbaric Oxygen Treatment, grape fruit seed extract, Epsom salt baths,  Low Dose Naltrexone, Glutathione and many more.  They also recognize that patients that have been severely ill for extended periods of time often suffer from other comorbidities such as adrenal insufficiency, reactivated viruses, thyroid dysfunctions, and other hormonal imbalances.  One ILADS proponent, Dr, Richard Horowitz, has described an entire paradigm that must be gone through if a patient remains ill. 

I will admit that we need better science to describe what is going on with these patients that remain ill.  Above all else we need better and more reliable diagnostic tests.  However, it's clear that there is a subset of doctors that are fighting to get patients better and one that is not.  So why is the group that is not helping patients establishing treatment guidelines for Lyme Disease?