This abstract (full study due out soon), by some of our best, has many, many IDSA/CDC busters in it.
One, for example, is that people who met the CHRONIC Lyme definition (CLD) by Stricker, et. al. may have multiple strains/species of Lyme and none are picked up with testing.
This study wasn't done only the USA, but Mexico too- showing that it isn't limited to one specific area.
It basically says chronic Lyme exists, it can encompass multiple Borrelia and the toad heads who continue to say it doesn't exist are wrong.
Another point is some people have one or more Relapsing Fever Borrelia strains and NONE of them are picked up on standard tests.
Very, very good info included that will help us a lot!
Hope Australia and those in areas where there is no Lyme disease (according to IDSA/CDC) can use this to help them too.
Sorry about it being messy at the site. Couldn't get the pdf on there, so had to make do.
The good news is that this article is "open access."
The bad news is that it's not indexed on PubMed -- at least not yet!
More good news to off-set the "bad news" though: It's been accessed ~2000 times already, even without having been indexed on PubMed.
Does this mean that PubMed's "authority" (as the final arbiter of what's considered to be real science) is being challenged by European-based MDPI ?
PS - I had to search around a long time to find out what MDPI is. Here's a link to explain MDPI's history: https://www.mdpi.com/about/history Posted by Rivendell (Member # 19922) on :
Of course Chronic Lyme Exists. Thanks for the link.