Topic: Babesiosis said to be NOT endemic- part of the problem
Tincup
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829
posted
QUOTE- "We report the details of two cases of clinical transfusion-transmitted babesiosis and one asymptomatic infection identified in red blood cell recipients in two nonendemic states (South Carolina and Maryland)...
which, when combined with three recent additional cases in nonendemic states, totals six recipient infections in three nonendemic states."
HUH? Maryland not endemic for Babesiosis? That's news to me.
AND, it is the majority of the problem!
CDC/IDSA holding off on reporting numbers and "declaring" we don't have Lyme there or there, or Babesia there and there, so doctors are not being informed and nothing is being done to help patients or prevent this &^$#%&!!!
posted
Seems to me that their article is based on the assumption that there are NO cases in SC and MD. I guess they haven't heard the saying "Absence of proof is NOT proof of absence".
If they can investigate additional recipients of the same donor, can they determine where the donor lived? Maybe it was not an area designated as endemic!
There are cases of Babesiosis in SC, but the ones I know were diagnosed and treated out of state, so they are not counted here. To me, it seems possible that the donors could have been undiagnosed cases living here or in MD.
It's so frustrating when statements are made about where cases of LD are located. An accurate statement would be "where cases of LD are diagnosed and reported."
The "powers that be" have not opened their eyes to the true extent of the problem of TBDs. Doctors are not well informed.
Don't know if it's true, but I was told that in Medical School, they spend about a day studying LD.
As I've said before, in 1988, one doctor in Columbia told me "We don't waste our time studying an illness that we'll see only one bizarre case in a lifetime."
I'm aware of the fact that some doctors are diagnosing and treating LD, but they don't report the numbers. Those keeping the records decide whether it's really a case of Lyme or not. Result is very low numbers for our state. I can imagine the source of the information they're using.
So sad, so frustrating, and it never improves.
Tincup, thanks for keeping us informed about everything going on. Don't know how you do it, but I appreciate it more than you know.
Posts: 4638 | From South Carolina | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
Tincup
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829
posted
I agree with you cbb. I've watched as the department of health has threatened doctors and ordered them NOT to test for or treat Babesiosis "because we don't have it here".
And of course they do.
Is that insane or not? Wickedness beyond belief.
And thanks for the kind words. Keep on fighting, that's all we can do.
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[lol]](graemlins/lol.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic