kungfudao
Senior Member
- Messages
- 137
- Location
- Los Angeles
That seems to be the opinion of some people who don't have it.I would be interested in the research you are talking about,That points to PTLD. Most of what I have seen is very speculative and has never been proven .On the other hand There is plenty research showing chronic late infections after antibiotics, which doesn't mean there was no benefit.Wouldn't that be untreated lyme, late stage lyme or even disseminated late-stage Lyme disease?
I interpret chronic as meaning a condition where only the symptoms can be controlled verses acute which is a condition that can be resolved.
Whether that's correct or not, I don’t know. The terms are confusing.
I guess I'm saying long term treatment with antibiotics may not be needed. The evidence seems to be pointing to some people possibly taking them longer as it's harder to treat than originally thought but that after a certain time, I guess depending on the individual, other treatments might be more appropriate as the original infection may be gone but there are still symptoms caused by the original infection. So in that sense it could be chronic if there is no cure?
It's really confusing so don't know which terminology is correct.
But anyway you look at it, it's a serious condition which can lead to devestating health consequences.
Barb
The definition of chronic as I under stood was incurable or recurring at least up to this point.