Pardon me if this is a stupid question, I'm new to all this, but...
I keep hearing these Lyme tests are rather inaccurate and I have to wonder...
If Lyme is a bacteria that can be seen under a microscope, why can they not take a blood/tissue sample and confirm diagnosis by way of seeing the bacteria in your body??? Posted by Amy C (Member # 19297) on :
I may not be best at explaining this so hope someone else comes along. LOL
But I think it's that the bacteria are shaped like screws and drill into your tissues and into organs so it's not always in your blood. It would be like hit or miss to look for it.
So they look for the antibodies instead. Which in that case you don't always have them cause it would depend on if your immune system is making them. If your immune system is so bad from chronic lyme it may not be making the antibodies to help fight lyme.
Not sure if I explained that correctly. But it's something like that. LOL
Posted by sutherngrl (Member # 16270) on :
The spirochetes drill deep into our tissues and organs. They really like the heart and brain. It would be a very invasive procedure and it would be hit and miss at that.
This is why Lyme Disease is a "clinical" diagnosis.
Posted by LightAtTheEnd (Member # 24065) on :
Apparently a small number of bacteria are enough to make you sick, and they multiply very slowly, so you may not have a large number even in your body.
Then they have all kinds of places to hide away from the bloodstream.
Then they can hide inside your own cells, or roll up into a cyst, and be difficult to see even if they are there. They have tricky ways to camouflage themselves.
Posted by PaigeTurner (Member # 26771) on :
I saw the Lida Mattman lecture. that is really fascinating!
With all that work, evidence, and information about the Lyme bacteria, it befuddles me all the doctors don't subscribe to it being a real, or rather, ongoing illness.
In looking for a Lyme doctor, I found out of a family friend whose sister contracted Lyme at a young age...
She was "cured" with abx but is still suffering. I'll quote the e-mail here:
"She got it when she was like 7 or 8. Yes, the lime disease is gone, but now she has rheumatoid arthritis and asthma. Which were complications from the disease."
"Complications" from the disease, but the Lyme is "gone"?! So very sad.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
NO. I wouldn't say her Lyme disease is GONE. She likely was not treated long enough or with the right meds. Then she may also have undetected coinfections which require another set of medications in order to clear them.
She needs a new Lyme Literate MD!
Posted by PaigeTurner (Member # 26771) on :
I get that, Lymetoo, that was my point.
But because people can be so trusting of their doctors, if you suggest this could still be a Lyme infection, you get looked at like a nutter and they don't believe you.
When I told our family friend (is a doctor) that I don't feel the abx he gave me is sufficient to eradicate the Lyme, he basically told me all this stuff is BS and unwarranted.
My belief is that most doctors are indoctrinated. When it comes to thinking outside the box or questioning what they were told in med school (not just with Lyme but with so many things), they freak out and write you off.
Most doctors I know don't believe in vitamins and nutrition quite the way they should.
Doctors are required to take ONE class on nutrition in med school...ONE! I know more about it than most doctors I've come across and I have no "credentials" other than I research things and care about what I put into my body.
Western allopathy does not practice preventative medicine/general good health...it treats symptoms, and sometimes not even that.
![[confused]](graemlins/confused.gif)