I just listened in....and I don't mean to be overly critical.....but for the 2 minutes I just heard, it already seems to be incorrect. He said that 75-80% of people present with a bullseye rash. Most of the people I know never got a bullseye, including myself. I've heard it said many times that less than 50% get the rash.
Then he went on to say that in diagnosing, most with bloodwork will have a positive serology. I stopped listening after that.
Posted by lax mom (Member # 38743) on :
Thanks abxnomore!
Posted by beths (Member # 18864) on :
OMG-the past speaker just said-no justification for long term abx! 90% cured with short term abx?
Posted by lax mom (Member # 38743) on :
I didn't know that the term "chronic Lyme" wasn't used anymore.
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
- From posts above, sounds like the IDSA voices, not lyme literate at all.
Of course, "chronic lyme" is a proper term to describe chronic borreliosis but the IDSA denies the term and that the illness being can even be chronic.
This is NOT at all what those studing lyme have found out (who are ILADS-minded).
I was not able to hear the conference but hope that other doctors will correct the errors.
I think (I hope) that the TB Alliance IS an ILADS-minded organization so I hope this works out to be a good conference. I think they had both IDSA and ILADS doctors on the panels.
By the time I got my breakfast (on the other coast), this appears to be over and won't connect. Sorry I missed it. Some of the tweets posted at the site seem to say that some doctors DID have very good details to share. Hope it turned out well, after all. -