Dr James Schaller
tick infection pearls chat free books testimonials main page books and articles schaller health creed free consult testimonies search
menu main page what's new second opinion new patient meet doctor schaller location, travel

ILADS' Position Paper on the
CDC's Statement Regarding Lyme Diagnosis

The Center for Disease Control's (CDC) position on diagnosing Lyme disease (LD) is an oversimplification of a complicated clinical condition. The CDC's two-tiered approach—using an ELISA and confirming positives by both IgM and IgG Western blots—potentially misses more than 40% of the patients. One year after the tick bite, this percentage may be greater than 50%.

The two-tiered protocol was developed from studies using Lyme patients presenting with the Erythema Migrans (EM) rash [bulls-eye rash-my insert] and arthritis or neuroborreliosis. However, not all Lyme patients have these symptoms. In one of the NIH-sponsored studies, blood was taken from Lyme-suspected patients every two weeks for a period of four months, and any positive event (defined by the presence of 5 of the 10 bands by IgG Western blot) qualified the patient.2 In contrast, other NIH-sponsored research indicated that many defined Lyme patients did not meet the CDC Western blot criteria (the presence of 5 of the 10 bands), and that the IgM response was a useful predictor of infection at all stages of disease.

Lyme disease is a problematic diagnosis. The position adopted by the CDC makes it more complicated. Many patients do not elicit an antibody response great enough to be positive by currently available ELISA assays ...TO READ THIS INTERESTING ARTICLE AND TO SEE ITS REFERENCES CLICK THIS LINK: www.ilads.org/cdc_paper.htm

This is merely a baby taste.

Dr. J

Bank Towers, Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL
disclaimer privacy