I agree with you Frango.
Not one Lyme literate physician is on the new panel. At 10,000/year threshold for determining eligibility, this bumped even those who would perhaps treat on a much lesser ratio of Lyme patient.
I can appreciated that there is a concern for long term abx and their long term effect; but, what confuses me is why there is not an emergent R&D much needed plan in place by the very ones who are 'concerned' to ensure the development of a protocol for both diagnostics and curable treatment.
So much of one side of the table's 'investment' if you will, seems to be related to the denial of and the defense of a position; but how are patients to be confident that those who do understand the deadly consequences of no or late diagnosis (and this is acknowledged by both standards of care represented).
Those who serve in these positions of authority and decision making regarding the very protocols that are needed to provide care offer no answers nor even a plan. No funding for research allocated.
No matter what label is given for the symptoms (ie: post Lyme, Lyme syndrome, Lyme arthritis, chronic Lyme) we have a concern that when the very doctors who have this authority and seemingly express concern for the patient by taking a strong position on extreme narrow treatment parameter are not communicating any level of hope for future resolution to the disease. No al
location of funds; no direction. Just simply, it does not exist on one hand and then, describing symptoms that suggest it does on the other; but a supposed 'fear' (regarding drug treatment) for treating it in longer courses.
This makes no sense and creates the appearance of a wolf in sheep's clothing to me.
I am not a proponent of long term high doses of antibiotics. No one is. No one wants to be in the position that patients find themselves. However, doctors are being forced to use outdated drugs. They are being forced to use combination abx in order to achieve a blood level worthy of killing the unfolding nature of these pathogens that supposedly does not exist; even though we have more and more credible science to prove it does.
We have not had a new antibiotic to address they types of infectious diseases for over 20 years. And there are no bridges in place to provide for this even though emerging science and statistics clearly indicate the pandemic nature of this disease being on the rise. No one is holding the 'gatekeepers' who have been given the prestigious role of publishing such guidelines, accountable.
I think the place to start is a phone call to CT AG office to ask them the ?? you have. And to request a POC for the umbudsman for patient input. What would they recommend? Your questions are valid.
Post Edited (sojourner) : 2/5/2009 8:32:18 AM (GMT-7)