Hacker News Reader

This is a study into late untreated borreliosis (a real thing), which is very different from 'chronic lyme'.

Can you elaborate on the difference between the terms “late untreated borreliosis” and “chronic Lyme disease”? Borreliosis is just another name for Lyme disease. What distinction are you so sure about that I’m missing?

Chronic lyme is a vague term that usually refers to people who have already been treated, but continue to have symptoms, and may not test positive. It's a grabbag of stuff.

I have heard this claim before but I couldn’t follow the logic, genuinely would like to understand your perspective.

So “late untreated borreliosis” is a “real thing” but if someone gets borreliosis, gets treated, yet their symptoms persist (this scenario is what people usually mean by the term chronic Lyme) then that is NOT a “real thing”?

Does this mean that treatment is 100% effective or that if it didn’t work, then it wasn’t borreliosis to begin with?

Don't expect a good answer. That brand of skepticism is performative rationality devoid of actual critical thinking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com