A shot to prevent Lyme disease could be on its way • Hacker News Board

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

#241

Post by babyblueblanket » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:27 PM UTC

kortex wrote: post #181

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Chronic Lyme” is a very challenging topic because it has become a mix of legitimate symptoms (those suffering post-treatment Lyme disease) but also a pseudoscience catch-all diagnosis promoted by bad alternative medicine practitioners. Contrary to popular belief, the CDC and medical community do actually continue to research the topics of potential Lyme persistence and post-treatment Lyme symptoms. We’re discussing…

That's fair. But I'd rather humor the quackish side of chronic lyme and see some progress being made, rather than lean to the side of dismissing them, along with people with legitimate complaints. The inability to adequately assay Lyme speaks more to how bad we are at assaying diseases, than to the (il-)legitimacy of the disease.

The issue with humoring the quackish side of chronic lyme is that you swiftly get into supposed treatments that are, in fact, quackery or can be actively harmful to patients (such as extremely long antibiotic treatments). So you risk both wasting money and harming people by humoring stuff you know is nonsense.

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

#242

Post by wildmanx » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:30 PM UTC

hitpointdrew wrote: post #239

wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

>but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? It wasn't "very rare" and the side effect was that it literally gave people lym disease. Why are vaccinations a political thing now, and if anyone raises any questions whatsoever on any vaccine they are "anit-vax".

> It wasn't "very rare" and the side effect was that it literally gave people lym disease.

Again, 59 of 1.4 million. I call that "very rare". About half a million Americans get Lyme from ticks, every year. You do the math. Even if there is a causal connection to the shot (which has not been established) then that's still orders of magnitude lower than the risk of actually getting the bacteria in you if you somewhat frequently visit the woods. And if you don't, just don't get the shot. Your call.

So yes, that's a textbook "anti-vax" sentiment. It's not based on the actual scientific evidence but uses people's overall fear of vaccinations. And it hurts everybody, because the result is that even people who want the vaccine can't get it. Otherwise I wouldn't actually care. Let the anti-vax people suffer if they choose to, but leave me out of this.

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

#243

Post by gjsman-1000 » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:31 PM UTC

wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

There is a difference between vaccine skeptic and anti-vax. Imagine if we didn't have people watching over our tech industry because that would be anti-tech, or our banking industry because that's anti-bank. No, we call them skeptics because we realize that's very different than someone who says "abolish tech and banks."

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

#244

Post by hitpointdrew » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:31 PM UTC

wildmanx wrote: post #242

hitpointdrew wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? It wasn't "very rare" and the side effect was that it literally gave people lym disease. Why are vaccinations a political thing now, and if anyone raises any questions whatsoever on any vaccine they are "anit-vax".

> It wasn't "very rare" and the side effect was that it literally gave people lym disease. Again, 59 of 1.4 million. I call that "very rare". About half a million Americans get Lyme from ticks, every year. You do the math. Even if there is a causal connection to the shot (which has not been established) then that's still orders of magnitude lower than the risk of actually getting the bacteria in you if you somewhat f…

>Again, 59 of 1.4 million

Source?

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

#245

Post by wildmanx » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:34 PM UTC

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #243

wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

There is a difference between vaccine skeptic and anti-vax. Imagine if we didn't have people watching over our tech industry because that would be anti-tech, or our banking industry because that's anti-bank. No, we call them skeptics because we realize that's very different than someone who says "abolish tech and banks."

I'm all for being critical. I'd find it terrible if side effects are just ignored. I wouldn't take any vaccines if that's the case.

But in this case, the facts are on the table. There is no scientific basis in pulling the vaccine from the market. But there was enough propaganda to stoke so much fear that everybody got scared and that was that.

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

#246

Post by wildmanx » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:34 PM UTC

hitpointdrew wrote: post #244

wildmanx wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't "very rare" and the side effect was that it literally gave people lym disease. Again, 59 of 1.4 million. I call that "very rare". About half a million Americans get Lyme from ticks, every year. You do the math. Even if there is a causal connection to the shot (which has not been established) then that's still orders of magnitude lower than the risk of actually getting the bacteria in you if you somewhat f…

>Again, 59 of 1.4 million Source?

The article we are discussing here. You read it, right?

(And the article got that number from the FDA.)

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

#247

Post by at_a_remove » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:35 PM UTC

mrfusion wrote: post #198

kortex wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty they do, while I haven't seen them in my yard, they love my neighbor's ~1acre lawn abutting woods across the street. I see them hanging out there all hours of the day. I actually just learned about guinea fowl elsewhere in this thread! Definitely will be looking into it. I also started doing the permethrin soaked cotton balls in tubes. Mice collect the cotton for their nest and it kills ticks. Also our do…

They could probably crawl over from your neighbors yard. Not sure how far they travel. Or hitch a ride on mice? Wow if tick killing meds exist for dogs maybe we could get deer on those. Problem solved?

I know when I bring my deer into the vet for their annual checkup, they'll probably offer the shot pretty soon.

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

#248

Post by gjsman-1000 » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:36 PM UTC

wildmanx wrote: post #245

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between vaccine skeptic and anti-vax. Imagine if we didn't have people watching over our tech industry because that would be anti-tech, or our banking industry because that's anti-bank. No, we call them skeptics because we realize that's very different than someone who says "abolish tech and banks."

I'm all for being critical. I'd find it terrible if side effects are just ignored. I wouldn't take any vaccines if that's the case. But in this case, the facts are on the table. There is no scientific basis in pulling the vaccine from the market. But there was enough propaganda to stoke so much fear that everybody got scared and that was that.

Yep - and I live in Minnesota, I've had Lyme's before but it thankfully was an obvious rash that taking strong antibiotics for a few weeks took care of. I would take it if I could.

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

#249

Post by Workaccount2 » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

wepple wrote: post #144

d4rkp4ttern wrote: post #139

Are tick repellents any good? Any recommendations?

Permethrin on your clothes ( not on your skin), and deet. But you’ll still get them if you’re outside, and should do daily tick checks anyway.

Note that permethrin is very toxic to cats. You may want to be careful if you have them around.

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

#250

Post by acdha » Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 3:38 PM UTC

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #243

wildmanx wrote: post #236

What shocks me most with this story is that there is a vaccine (Lymerix), and it's pretty effective (76-92 percent after three injections) but apparently some anti-vax propaganda and a class-action lawsuit essentially removed it from the market. Based on a very rare side effect. Wtf? How can that be? Just tell people the risks of side effects, and if they are ok with that risk then the manufacturer is off the hook. I…

There is a difference between vaccine skeptic and anti-vax. Imagine if we didn't have people watching over our tech industry because that would be anti-tech, or our banking industry because that's anti-bank. No, we call them skeptics because we realize that's very different than someone who says "abolish tech and banks."

The thing is, we have that process at multiple levels from peer-review and the many stages of government approval and it's rigorous to the point that people have questioned whether it's causing problems due to delays and costs preventing development of vaccines for less widespread diseases and increasing costs.

COVID-19 has provided a great example of how well this process works: even the emergency use authorizations required multiple levels of clinical trials and the anti-vax propagandists mining the VAERS database for talking points can do so because there's a requirement to make a public report of anything which happens after someone is vaccinated even if there's no real suspicion that it was related to the vaccine.