Just as the recent nation-wide survey suggested, Lyme is present in the tropical parts of China too: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26309619
-
Welcome to Phoenix Rising!
Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.
To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.
Lyme in the tropics
- Thread starter msf
- Start date
There have been some cases of borreliosis in Thailand and other countries in the South East Asian region.
China is quite hands on when dealing with stuff like this so i expect to see some interesting research and/or treatments coming from them in the next couple of years, especially with TCM.
China is quite hands on when dealing with stuff like this so i expect to see some interesting research and/or treatments coming from them in the next couple of years, especially with TCM.
Can't you almost hear the chanting chorus of "False Positives" flowing from the IDSA towers?
I fear that chant of false positives may be a recurring theme in the new Guidelines. It's going to be increasingly difficult to deny the surging number of individuals that test positive -- pre- and post-treatment -- even with the outrageously high thresholds often currently set.
I think a possible stance might be, "If you test negative, you can feel confident you don't have Lyme. If you test positive, measure against the backdrop of a specific symptom set (reduced to five or so), limited geography (what's the probability that YOUR neighborhood has Bb), etc, and maybe re-test in a bit, depending."
A real conundrum these folks may have, imo, is explaining away, comfortably, the numbers of people who test positive post-treatment. They won't be able to keep to the party line that some folks will just keep snaring positives. Most meaningful studies demonstrate titers decline after treatment. The incidences where that isn't the case are only going to mount.
It would seem China couldn't care less about the IDSA scriptures, thank goodness.
I fear that chant of false positives may be a recurring theme in the new Guidelines. It's going to be increasingly difficult to deny the surging number of individuals that test positive -- pre- and post-treatment -- even with the outrageously high thresholds often currently set.
I think a possible stance might be, "If you test negative, you can feel confident you don't have Lyme. If you test positive, measure against the backdrop of a specific symptom set (reduced to five or so), limited geography (what's the probability that YOUR neighborhood has Bb), etc, and maybe re-test in a bit, depending."
A real conundrum these folks may have, imo, is explaining away, comfortably, the numbers of people who test positive post-treatment. They won't be able to keep to the party line that some folks will just keep snaring positives. Most meaningful studies demonstrate titers decline after treatment. The incidences where that isn't the case are only going to mount.
It would seem China couldn't care less about the IDSA scriptures, thank goodness.
Last edited:
When I PMed ´Thailand borreliosis,´it came up with this, presumably because Maes is based there now:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26081141
No news to us, but it´s good that they are spreading the word.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26081141
No news to us, but it´s good that they are spreading the word.