>The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article.
Simply saying this doesn't make it true. This is not true and that Wikipedia article is outdated.
Simply saying this doesn't make it true. This is not true and that Wikipedia article is outdated.
I guess the hope for promoters of CLD would be that it's possible to treat the currently irreversible PTLD symptoms using antibiotics, rather than accept something akin to a fibromyalgia diagnosis.
once YOU read that paper, please post YOUR peer review summary here.
enough with appeals to authority. wikipedia is not even an authoritative source to begin with.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7jk9q/rick-sponaugle-pots-c...
Edit: Is Lyme-literate another term you and your internet friends use?
Look at the case against him: https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/Healt...
Scam Dr's like this are causing the FUD you are spreading.
These are spirochetes in the brain/spine of a dead patient.
She had proven lyme diagnosis in the past, has been given the standard treatment and had good response(!), only to relapse, never recover and went on to develop neurological issues years later, and died.
The brain was donated and autopsied.
Full study: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.6280...
Are you saying the lead scientist on this paper, from the Tulane National Primate Research Center is a scammer? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulane_National_Primate_Resear...)
Seems like a big accusation.
While it's interesting that the treatment was "successful" and that symptoms continued, this isn't really a strong statement of support for something like Chronic Lyme Disease or at least its widespread presentation - much more likely a statement of support for Lyme Disease bacteria not always being treated by the regimen, or potentially even that it's easy for someone to get a second infection and have no significant immunity.