Seeking Truth

Hi MysteryLyme,

I'm not going to defend the long-term use of antibiotics, because over-prescription of antibiotics for me as a child resulted in candida and leaky gut.  I believe I may have had a PANDAS infection as a child, but the medical industry never looked deep enough to find it.  Not to mention all the mercury and radium/radon (in water) I've been exposed to through amalgam fillings, vaccines, and living in walking distance of a nuclear reactor as a child. 

I have not yet seen "Under Our Skin," but I can tell you that allopathic medicine has likely contributed to more of my health problems than it's resolved, and I prefer homeopathic (natural) medicine whenever possible, relying on allopathic means only when necessary.  Bitten at age 14, not one of the 12+ doctors I saw over the next 15 years ever tested me for Lyme.  When I did get tested, it was by coincidence, as I was actually looking for gut parasites, and figured I'd do the blood parasite test just for the heck of it.  The dietician recommended the parasite lab--the doctor was clueless.

There is a film called "Healing Cancer From the Inside Out" that illustrates the bully pulpit created by AMA docs early on in Chicago to push the homeopaths out.  Being that I am from Chicago, I am not surprised by this.  This is not the only place this battle is documented--Max Gerson was a victim of the same sort of bullying, and that is documented in the film "Dying to Have Known."  His cancer clinic was forced to move to Mexico, and he was poisoned with arsenic twice.

As a result of my health problems, I have literally had to become my own doctor through lay reading and education.  Fortunately, I found a good MD last year that uses a combination of homeopathic and allopathic methods, but docs like that are all too uncommon.  As part of my journey, due to my gut issues, I have also worked with several nutritionists, which have helped me learn a lot about health in general.  Typical MDs only take a semester of nutrition.  They are trained to treat symptoms with drugs that suppress those symptoms, rather than going deep enough to find the cause of the symptoms.  If you know the cause, you have a much greater chance of fixing the problem.  I firmly believe that the body, in most cases, has the ability to heal itself if given the right conditions to do so.  That may mean medication, but often it can be done with minerals, nutrient-dense foods, and herbals.

achievinggrace said...

MysteryLyme said...
And if you disagree... go ahead and fill me in with some actual facts and studies concerning long term antibiotics

(Sorry a computer glitch prevents me from quoting)

Referring to the studies you posted below:

It is as I predicted in my previous rant.  The first study you post has as it's mark of efficacy an examination of the cerebrospinal fluid for Bb DNA.  The Borrelia bacteria can be hiding in many places, avoiding detection.  This is not a definative test. 

Also with that study, many people had to drop out and the study was discontinued because of "adverse events".  Were these herx reactions or the expected complications so common with IV delivery of meds?

In the second study they had problems with people dropping out of the study because of "adverse events associated with IV antibiotic use".  They note an improvement in fatique over placebo.  From this study they merely conclude that 10 weeks of IV antibiotic therapy is not effective.

I can totally agree with that statement.

The problem is that then morphs and gets reported as, "Long-term Antibiotic Therepy is ineffective and dangerous".

Which is simply unfounded and crashingly deleterious to people seeking treatment for unresolved Lyme disease symptoms.  It would be like someone taking a tough cut of beef and cooking over a high barbecue flame.  They find the result a chewy, charred inedible mess and make the statement, "Beef should not be barbecued."  Followed by measures to ensure that people could get hold of barbecue grills.  This would probably start a country-wide  revolution that no doubt would start in Texas!  Messy analogy, sorry, and my apologies to the vegetarians.

And, again, I am sorry, I cannot read the third study because of computer problems.  My point is valid I think;  these studies are only proving that high dose IV antibiotics administered with no other supportive therapies for 10-12 weeks doesn't work.  And then the fall out is that chronic/late-stage/disseminated Lyme patients are denied the benefits of long-term oral antibiotics administered with proper monitoring and supportive treatments.  Low and slow is the way to treat chronic/late-stage/disseminated Lyme, whether with antibiotics or natural products.  And it's the best way to cook some very tasty cuts of beef!

.....in addition to what Lymster just posted, the 'studies' done apparently  did not take into account any previous Lyme treatment the subjects might have already had, nor were co-infections considered, nor were the treatment dosages at therapy levels....etc.

Here are two articles that discuss the alleged flaws in the studies: 

http://www.ilads.org/about_ILADS/position_papers2.html

http://www.lymeproject.com/research/lyme_research_studies7.html

Here's a snippet:

1) The design of RCTs did not address the range of treatment options available in an actual practice,

2) The findings cannot be generalized to actual practice,

3) The power of the evidence is inadequate to draw definite conclusions,

4) The evidence is too heterogeneous to make strong recommendations,

5) The risk to an individual of facing a long-term debilitating illness has not been considered,

6) The risk to society of a growing chronically ill population has not been considered,

7) Treatment delay has not been considered as a confounder, and

8) Co-infections have not been considered as a confounder.

Great post, Traveler !