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

At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#111

Post by rnvannatta »

lima wrote: post #46
dermacentor wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is your proof? They have thermal sensors on their forearms and are known to climb trees. Why wouldn't they approach from above?

Ticks climb low vegetation (not just grass) and wait for a host to pass by ("questing"). If you're going to disagree with basic textbook biology knowledge, the burden of proof is on you.

Ticks don't exclusively hunt via questing. Some will actively pursue hosts if needed. The lone star tick is especially known for this: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/3/478

> In contrast to D. variabilis, A. americanum is regarded as a hunter tick, which will walk/crawl rapidly across many meters when attracted by host odors. This behavior enhances its host range since these ticks do not have to wait for a passing host.

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#112

Post by zygy »

tito wrote: post #89
lima wrote: post #25

Unfortunately, there are major issues with this approach. The vendor claims "lab-level accuracy" (conveniently omitting the actual accuracy numbers), but the test is a lateral flow test, which means its Limit of Detection is going to be orders of magnitude worse than molecular tests. Tick tests do not require FDA clearance, so their claims are most likely unreviewed. Existing lab tests for ticks are almost universall…

It's been 15 years since I worked on open source PCR machines, but has someone not figured out how to build a "one time use" disposable type qPCR test? A single test, not an instrument. There's no way these types of tests should be left up to lateral flow etc.

how about Lucira?

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#113

Post by p0w3n3d »

murderfs wrote: post #62
p0w3n3d wrote: post #58

According to evidence based medicine, infected tick's bite is not equal to infection of the patient. It means that the test can be false positive and based solely on it, people would start exhausting treatment for nothing

The "exhausting treatment" is a single pill, once.

for lyme disease? Can you share which?

I believe in my country this is treated differently...

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#114

Post by KellyCriterion »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #107
KellyCriterion wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoters shouldnt be allowed to vote if they cant use Google: Here is the link for all downvoters :-D https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32465108 (Aug 2022, exactly what I said with "some years ago")

Downvoters maybe read the link you responded to whilst you didn't? The Pfizer Lyme vaccine is in the Wikipedia article linked that you responded to, and the link there works whilst the link in the story you linked is dead. Whilst it might be nice to remove some downvote privileges we could apply the rules we do have and not complain about downvotes. To my view, your original comment was fine, but I could also see oth…

> but I could also see others wouldn't like it.

Yes, and thats interesting and allows for sure some question for why getting downvoted, when everything you do is pointing to an article on the same forum to adjacent topic .. and still get a punch :-D

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#115

Post by quacked »

codingdave wrote: post #32
monster_truck wrote: post #6

Sign me up. Used to be a big Event Of The Year when my grandpa found one after spending all day out in their 'garden' (a few acres bordering deep woods). I remember being maybe 11 when he found one, let me try and figure out how to crush it, I couldn't. He showed me how to use the butt of a butterknife and leverage to get the fuckers I don't live anywhere near a proper forest and we've had several close calls this ye…

Getting a tick is no big event. It is just something that happens if you live near woods. I own a forest, and get ticks on occasion. Gross, but no big deal. Grab a tick-pulling tool and gently coax them out. Don't crush them or force them out with a blunt object, you are just as likely to tear their head off and leave it stuck in you, which just makes it more likely for you to get sick. Just remove them before 24 hou…

For me, getting a tick gave me a life-threatening allergy to the galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose molecule, which is manufactured in mammal cells. I will die if I eat red meat and go into possible anaphylaxis if I have dairy. There are also thousands of other foods I can't eat because they're either high in histamine molecules or they included mammal processing at some step (for instance red wine is often filtered through gelatin). This allergy is currently understood to be transmitted immediately at the bite.

I definitely agree that without these nightmarish tick conditions it's a non-event, but with them...

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#116

Post by dd8601fn »

dofm wrote: post #67
throw93949990 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it is a raise of dog ownership in UK as well. They bring ticks inside houee, and shed it in public parks. Our dog used to have like 50 ticks everytime it returned from run.

People are more aware of ticks because of dog ownership, I think, but I don't know if this is a real risk because of the widespread use of tick repellent treatments for dogs (which are their own little eco-disaster). COVID lockdowns changed us and we're a bit more outdoorsy. But mostly it is the deer population. There are now four times as many wild deer in the UK as there were before the first indigenous case of Lym…

> (which are their own little eco-disaster).

I'm worried that I don't want to know the answer to this, but why?

I use one of the common types on my dogs and that stuff is crazy effective on ticks.

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#117

Post by dermacentor »

lima wrote: post #48
dermacentor wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ticks can transmit Powassan and Heartland viruses within the first 15 minutes of a bite. Still feeling cool, suave, experienced, and fearless?

And tick-borne encephalitis, in regions where that is endemic. No need to be rude, though!

Being rude to people spreading dangerous misinformation is mandatory on the internet, lima.

Do you kindly and charitably respond to antivaxxers and drug dealers?

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#118

Post by dermacentor »

codingdave wrote: post #44
dermacentor wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ticks can transmit Powassan and Heartland viruses within the first 15 minutes of a bite. Still feeling cool, suave, experienced, and fearless?

Hey, thanks - I wasn't aware of that. Glad to have learned it. But you can probably tell that there is no need to be snarky. Just your first sentence would have been more in line with how people engage with each other around here.

Your comment's first sentence says "getting a tick is no big event."

My response aims to inhibit and disrupt the complacency neuron of the reader that might have been activated by your comment. Sorry, but learning hurts sometimes.

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#119

Post by nephihaha »

dofm wrote: post #103
nephihaha wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ticks are much more common in Scotland thanks to deer population and high rainfall. Ticks prefer damp conditions to drought conditions, so this last summer wouldn't have been good for them. The damp makes it easier to survive while they are waiting for passing hosts. They also like long grass and overgrown areas. England in comparison is much more built up. We do have Lyme disease here unfortunately. I know someone w…

Yeah — you definitely get more ticks! I think everyone I know who lives in the Highlands or walks in it has been bitten, and that is one of the Lyme risk zones. But weirdly almost all of the peak risk areas for Lyme (and the encephalitis disease) are in the south. This would suggest risk is about deer population density rather than absolute numbers. So for example the New Forest, Thetford Forest and Exmoor have highe…

I can understand Thetford. There are masses of those small Chinese water deer in East Anglia. I saw quite a few about and as roadkill. No one really seems to hunt them so they would be an ideal vector.

Re: At-home test for infected ticks could improve Lyme Disease diagnosis

#120

Post by dermacentor »

lima wrote: post #46
dermacentor wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is your proof? They have thermal sensors on their forearms and are known to climb trees. Why wouldn't they approach from above?

Ticks climb low vegetation (not just grass) and wait for a host to pass by ("questing"). If you're going to disagree with basic textbook biology knowledge, the burden of proof is on you.

Humans walk to Burger King (not just McDonalds), provide payment, and wait for a cashier to provide them a hamburger. Everyone knows humans aren't capable of "hunting" with a "bow and arrow."

You are taking the official, "please don't panic" story from CDC and trying to force it down everyone's throats while claiming it's as basic a fact of biology as chromosomes and the mitochondria. It's not. This is a contested area of animal behavior, not a microscopic process.

Are you persistent in being dense because you want somebody to engage with and correct you, or are you genuinely trying to get people infected?

Post reply on HN