Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

outsideonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 428 posts

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#121

Post by inter_netuser »

polynox wrote: post #96
inter_netuser wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the first time CDC would be wrong. EDIT: why downvote facts? Recent example on a hot topic: "CDC reverses itself and says guidelines it posted on coronavirus airborne transmission were wrong" https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/09/21/cdc-covid-a...

Being wrong is the essence of science. By contrast, lyme disease is (1) more than 40 years old, (2) not contagious, and (3) has no political headwinds. There is little reason to distrust CDC on this.

Several states felt it was necessary to pass laws regarding Lyme and provide immunity to physicians willing to treat long haul covid...errr long haul lyme patients.

Seems rather naive to presume they had to pass new laws because Lyme has no political headwinds. It has plenty of controversy around it, for better or worse.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#122

Post by darkerside »

yodsanklai wrote: post #68
inter_netuser wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a look: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/628045/fneur-12-6... These are spirochetes in the brain/spine of a dead patient who had proven lyme diagnosis, has been given the standard treatment in the past, never recovered, developed dementia, died. Full study: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280... The wikipedia article you are quoting is outdated misinformation, please stop sprea…

I'd encourage anyone interested to do their own research. The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article. There are lot of myths around Lyme disease. https://eu.delawareonline.com/story/sponsor-story/nemours/20... Myth #5: Lyme disease can have debilitating, lifelong effects. Fact: When treated with antibiotics, Lyme disease, at any stage of presentation, is curable. Myth #6: My chil…

Garbage misinformation.

Myth #5: Lyme disease can have debilitating, lifelong effects.

Fact: When treated with antibiotics, Lyme disease, at any stage of presentation, is curable.

The fact provided in response assumes that people are getting antibiotic treatment, which is not always the case. If you go untreated, then you can have lifelong debilitating effects. I don't think even the author of the article would dispute that. So why is the author using weaselly arguments to imply that you can't? Seems like an attempt to confirm a biased judgement.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#123

Post by rory »

magpi3 wrote: post #106
zz865 wrote: post #48

Lyme is just one of the horrible diseases ticks carry. Would be nice to cull most of the deer in the North East. A few decades ago they were rare, now they're everywhere.

There are deer feeders that kill ticks. This solution seems more humane then trying to kill most of the deer.

Most may be too far, but I also see a bunch of postings that a cull is needed to slow the spread of CWD.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#125

Post by freshpots »

inter_netuser wrote: post #89
yodsanklai wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like saying it's not true doesn't make it untrue. Which is why I'd encourage everybody to do their own research, and at least know that there are a lot of controversies around this topic.

Please do YOUR research and read the paper that went thru peer review and was published. once YOU read that paper, please post YOUR peer review summary here. enough with appeals to authority. wikipedia is not even an authoritative source to begin with.

Are you also a big fan of the scam Dr. Sponaugle and the multitude of forums about chronic Lyme, and consider those charlatans scammers the truth?

https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7jk9q/rick-sponaugle-pots-c...

Edit: Is Lyme-literate another term you and your internet friends use?

Look at the case against him: https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/Healt...

Scam Dr's like this are causing the FUD you are spreading.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#126

Post by nicoburns »

jacksonkmarley wrote: post #108
inter_netuser wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impossible to do this reliably on a single patient with multiple conditions and advanced age. One could take a guess, but the error bar would be 0.0-1.0 This study set out to prove chronic persistence of the pathogen despite standard treatments, which is rather hard to dispute.

Being able to detect Borrelia Spirochetes is not equivalent to linking them with chronic symptoms.

I think the key thing is that it disproves the idea that the bacteria which cause the disease are reliably eliminated by antibiotics, which is typically a key point that those in the "it's not cause by lyme" camp rely on.

Doesn't prove that it is lyme, but it shifts the balance of probablities considerably.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#127

Post by darkerside »

jacksonkmarley wrote: post #108
inter_netuser wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impossible to do this reliably on a single patient with multiple conditions and advanced age. One could take a guess, but the error bar would be 0.0-1.0 This study set out to prove chronic persistence of the pathogen despite standard treatments, which is rather hard to dispute.

Being able to detect Borrelia Spirochetes is not equivalent to linking them with chronic symptoms.

Most CDC / IDSA folks will tell you that a course of antibiotics will rid the body of Lyme in all cases. The presence of spirochetes here should be enough for them to stop using that language. But it likely won't because there appears to be a systemic organizational bias against Lyme as a chronic condition, and I'm not sure why.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#128

Post by bluGill »

bkallus wrote: post #29
mschuster91 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in the US legal system that uses laypeople as judges ("juries"), lawsuits tend to be won by those who put on the best play for the juries, not by those who have the better arguments on their side like in Continental Europe. And to make matters worse, sometimes juries go for obscenely excessive damages against companies to "make a point" - just look at the McDonald's coffee case.

The McDonald's coffee case is often cited this way, but I think a spilled a coffee that causes third-degree burns and necessitates skin grafts is probably too hot. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restau...

Coffee drinkers like their coffee hot. They tell me the taste is much better when it is brewed hot. I know I was working at McDonalds at the time of the suit, and a few weeks later we adjusted our temperatures to the minimum of the acceptable range from the max, and immediately got complaints. (the complaints didn't start until after the adjustment)

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#129

Post by Dumblydorr »

spicybright wrote: post #23

As a US new england-er, this is game changer for walking through woods. For those un-informed, on a walk through any woods, you should always wear high socks, and do a full body check for ticks after. Deer ticks can be as small as a few grains of sand, and near undetectable if they latch on unless you have sharp eyes. Obviously they can transmit lymes. I had a close encounter a few years ago, but very luckily giant r…

Small edit: The article claims 3/4 have the circular rash, not 30%.

Re: A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way

#130

Post by bluGill »

imwillofficial wrote: post #25
markus92 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the antivaxers that attack vaccination sites and spread the propaganda.

You say the word “propaganda” pretty loosely. I bet you also said “3 weeks to flatten the curve!”

> I bet you also said “3 weeks to flatten the curve!”

No, if you check my comment history you will see that I said something along the lines of don't flatten the curve, kill it with longer, harsher lockdowns. Just search for my top downvoted posts. I still maintain that stance, two months of harsh worldwide lockdowns would have killed the spread completely and we would have been completely opened by the middle of last summer. Australia almost managed it alone, and a bit more of the world joining them could have.

Post reply on HN