I am going to throw in my two cents worth on this topic (I can't help myself, lol!!), just because I have spent the last couple of years not only initially engaging in similar 'discussions' on pages such as this (not only on facebook) but also studying the disingenuous reasons behind them and occasionally somewhat deviously getting to know those on the other side - I like to know what I am up against ;)
1. Sites and pages such as this one are NOT set up to collect genuine information or as a means of educating anyone. They are invariably created to 'have a laugh at the comments thrown at the mentally ill' (I am paraphrasing that into a more polite version of what I was told). By not being drawn into such 'discussions' those who are simply getting a kick or laugh out of it are denied their 'fun' and quickly lose interest and disappear. Remember that those who would chose to spend their time purposely ridiculing those in society who they consider to have a 'mental illness' can really not be considered anyone with reasonable human emotions or reasoning skills. As a species we really ought to have evolved beyond this, but apparently not for some, hey.
2. It is important to remember that those who are 'higher up the food chain' are currently using 'insurgency tactics' - yes, this sounds like paranoia but trust me it is the case. The point is simply to create discord and 'warring factions' and instigate what ends up looking like mob mentality - so that anyone who might seek education simply comes across a farcical situation and thus doesn't investigate further and is thus turned away from getting involved in a positive manner for fear of ridicule.
3. Your time and effort is soooo much better spent helping and supporting those who need it and educating on pages and forums that aim to do so - such as this one or those dedicated to genuinely raising awareness, getting out a message etc. Simply arguing with those who are specifically there to argue back is just giving those 'powers that be' exactly what they want.
4. In my experience, and it is only my opinion, if you are ever going to address one of those adamant Lyme or CLD deniers I have discovered that using a specific scientific peer reviewed article that backs your point is paramount. Simply post it up, make your case then walk away. You have put up the relevant info that would serve as an education tool for those who may read it - and then don't look back and be pulled into a name calling or mud slinging exercise. You have provided the education and the proof. The rest will not be a discussion, trust me.
Here is an example of what I like to use - firstly it is an article by Wormser and others since those you will find yourself up against will most likely refer to other (even creditable, reputable scientists in the field) as quack, they have a hard time arguing against the man whose views they are now spouting. Secondly it contains Wormser's evidence and opinions that agree with what we are generally arguing IS happening. For example - www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199707313370501#t=articleTop
The study sample only included those who definately had Lyme (those with an EM rash)...
'Patients who had been in areas where Lyme disease is endemic, who were eight years of age or older, and who had acute disseminated Lyme borreliosis were eligible for enrollment in this
open-label, controlled, randomized, multicenter study. The study was conducted between May 1990 and June 1994. Erythema migrans, defined as an expanding, annular, erythematous skin lesion at least 5 cm in diameter, was required for study entry. Disseminated disease was considered present if the patient had one or more of the following: more than one erythema migrans lesion; carditis manifested by heart block; neurologic abnormalities (seventh-cranial-nerve palsy or radiculitis of less than three months' duration); and acute large-joint arthritis.'
And yet by CDC standards for testing as argued today, many of them would now be told that they don't...hmmmm.
'Ninety-nine of the 140 patients (71 percent) were positive for B. burgdorferi on ELISA at entry into the study. Eighty-six of the 99 patients with a positive ELISA had two or more bands on the Western blot; 30 patients had more than five bands. Sixty-four of these 99 patients met the current CDC criteria for a positive Western blot. Forty-eight of the 64 met the criteria for a positive Western blot with respect to IgM but not IgG. Reactivity to the 41-kd flagellin band was the most common type and was observed for 92 percent of the patients who were positive on ELISA. Reactivity to outer surface protein C was the next most common, occurring in 64 percent of the patients (unpublished data). Of the 29 percent who were ELISA-negative, only 10 subsequently seroconverted.'
Another point made in this article highlights the treatment FAILURE rate -
It is stated that 'only one patient in each treatment group had objective evidence of active disease after treatment'. OK, so that is two patients, the most significant one from the group treated with Doxycycline, but as a percentage of the group, and thus as a percentage of the total number of those suffering from Lyme, for whom the CDC now maintains are ALL completely cured after receiving the same treatment, translates in to a HUGE number of people who will have 'objective treatment failure'. And that's from Wormser himself. Go figure.
Similarly 'Signs and symptoms attributable to the nervous or musculoskeletal system have been noted by other investigators. Two separate, large, retrospective studies of patients treated for early Lyme disease found a surprisingly high incidence of continued signs and symptoms, especially if treatment was delayed Shadick et al. found that 34 percent of patients in a suburban area of highly endemic disease just north of Boston who had been treated for early Lyme disease had long-term sequelae, including arthritis, arthralgia, cognitive impairment, and neuropathy. A similar investigation carried out in Westchester County, New York, found that 114 of the 215 patients studied (53 percent) had persistent signs and symptoms, including neurologic, cardiac, and musculoskeletal disorders.' Of course it is easy for the CDC to now write these off as PTLD symptoms, and yet the article itself clearly states that -
'The clinical significance of the persistent symptoms is difficult to assess. Early studies of Lyme disease focused primarily on the most severe outcomes of the disease, and in the past, patients with minor symptoms have generally been considered to have a favorable outcome.6,16,18 Although there are several possible explanations for the presence of residual symptoms — including continued infection'. Again, go figure.
OK, this is just one of my example but this post is now far, FAR too long (my apologies!!) but after my initially being caught up in such madness and depression causing facebook and other 'discussions' I learned my involvement in them in any other way only really hurt me, wasted my time and solved nothing by way of educating or addressing any one sensible. We know what the truth and the true problems are and by 'playing them at their own game' we will not be manipulated by those whose only intention is to make us question our own sanity - which we do NOT need to do - and we WILL win out in the end!!
Hang in there folks!!
Post Edited (silly sheep) : 3/20/2017 3:09:27 AM (GMT-6)