Chronic Lyme disease treatment could face insurance battle - Da...
There are 5 comments on the Brooks Community Newspapers story from Jun 17, 2009, titled Chronic Lyme disease treatment could face insurance battle - Da.... In it, Brooks Community Newspapers reports that:Many Lyme disease patients rejoiced last month when the General Assembly unanimously passed a bill specifying that physicians could diagnose the controversial chronic Lyme disease and prescribe equally contentious long-term antibiotics to treat the tick-borne illness without fear of reprisal.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Brooks Community Newspapers.
#1 Jun 19, 2009
These so called many organizations that oppose science based research and support profit based manipulation consist of the same groups of doctors that have been accepting bribes from insurance companies. So this article gets a bit misleading in the english. The American Lyme Disease Foundation to the Infectious Diseases Society of America both consist of the same group of doctors, so it's the same group, different names.
Insurance companies would be wise to pay for antibiotics because they are much cheaper than repeating a multitude of test for years and years until the patient eventually dies from the disease. Most of the antibiotics used are actually generics so it's much cheaper to treat than to ignore and cover up with other expensive "syndromes" that require brand name drugs from companies that pay off the corrupt individuals at IDSA. Keep in mind, since these syndromes are misdiagnosis, the expensive treatment continues indefinitely.
#2 Jun 20, 2009
The job of government is to protect and serve it's citizens. It was not protecting and serving by allowing it's state medical board to to be used as a tool to suppress opposing theories (Chronic Lyme Disease) and supporting dogma. There is no doubt that borrelia burgdorferi persists in-spite of "adequate" antibiotics in some cases, and the mainstream medical community (Infectious Disease Society Of America - IDSA - especially) seems adamant in denying that truth. I can prove they're wrong right now. Go to the pubmed.gov database, which is the government database that stores all the studies that are done in the scientific medical arena, and you'll find an vast number of studies showing that borrelia can persist after being exposed to the same dose, antibiotics and duration recommended by the IDSA . Search "burgdorferi persistent" in the pubmed search engine and you'll find some of them. I'll even name a few studies at the bottom of this rebuttal.
The IDSA, who writes up guidelines and influences the CDC and FDA -- claim that borrelia burgdorferi does not persist after 2-4 weeks of antibiotics. They also claim that their guidelines are not mandatory, but rather...suggestions that physicians can follow. That's amusing, because every major Insurance Company in the United States has a copy of the IDSA "guidelines" that it uses to decide whether it will approve or deny a medical claim sent in by a doctor -- in the area of tick-born treatment. If the insurance companies receive too many claims from a particular doctor who is treating Chronic Lyme Disease, they will not only deny treatment requests immediately, but they will often report the physician to the state medical board. It's in there interest to "not" pay for treatment, because treatment for Chronic Lyme Disease can be excessively expensive on a per-patient basis. The average cost of treatment for a single patient is over $100,000 dollars.
If you have a disagreement in science, but patients must still receive medical care based on the limited information -- then it should be up to the physician to decide, based on his or her experience and the objective and subjective information that testing and the patient's reports provide. When you've got evidence supporting both sides of a controversy, you can't act as though the opposing theory has no support and simply dismiss it dogmatically without consequence and resistance. This new law is the consequence, Worse yet, you can't just bring medical doctors up on charges for opposing a theory and treating patients based on the evidence that supports their position.
#3 Jun 20, 2009
Studies supporting persistent Lyme Disease (there are over 100 studies saying the same thing):
1: Ann Med. 1999 Jun;31(3):225-32.Links Borrelia burgdorferi detected by culture and PCR in clinical relapse of disseminated Lyme borreliosis. Oksi J, Marjamäki M, Nikoskelainen J, Viljanen MK.(Excerpt: The response to retreatment was considered good in nine patients. We conclude that the treatment of Lyme borreliosis with appropriate antibiotics for even more than 3 months may not always eradicate the spirochete."
2: Rheumatol Int. 1996;16(3):125-32.Links Intracellular persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi in human synovial cells. Girschick HJ, Huppertz HI, Rüssmann H, Krenn V, Karch H.(Exerpt: Treatment with ceftriaxone eradicated extracellular Borrelia burgdorferi, but spirochetes were reisolated after lysis of the synovial cells. Borrelia burgdorferi persisted inside synovial cells for at least 8 weeks. These data suggested that Borrelia burgdorferi might be able to persist within resident joint cells in vivo."
3: 1: Infection. 1996 Sep-Oct;24(5):347-53. Links Borrelia burgdorferi DNA in the urine of treated patients with chronic Lyme disease symptoms. A PCR study of 97 cases. Bayer ME, Zhang L, Bayer MH. Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA. "Excerpt Of the 97 patients, 72 (74.2%) were found with positive PCR and the rest with negative PCR. The 62 healthy volunteers were PCR negative. It is proposed that a sizeable group of patients diagnosed on clinical grounds as having chronic Lyme disease may still excrete Borrelia DNA, and may do so in spite of intensive antibiotic treatment."
4: Clin Infect Dis. 1997 Jul;25 Suppl 1:S52-6. Related Articles, Links Tetracycline therapy for chronic Lyme disease. Donta ST.(Exerpt: Two hundred seventy-seven patients with chronic Lyme disease were treated with tetracycline for 1 to 11 months. history of longer duration of symptoms or antibiotic treatment was associated with longer treatment times to achieve improvement and cure. These results support the use of longer courses of treatment in the management of patients with chronic Lyme disease. "
#4 Jun 20, 2009
Acting on my own, after taking twelve years of antibiotic therapy. I slowly stopped, and sure enough the symptoms returned and I am now in a wheelchair. Doctors must be allowed to do no harm in a manner that suits the disease in each person.
Difficult dilemma...yes? However, to allow this to happen insurance companies should be bound by the same standard.
#5 Jun 20, 2009
To doctors, insurers, lyme disease suffereres:
Look to the ILADS Guidelines and tools to help treat your lyme-disease. It works and is credible. This CDC/IDSA unholy union is going to be over eventually (hopefully soon!) Then lyme-infected insurance dues paying patients can start getting the adequate medicine they need and deserve.
Susan Ward, Nevada Lyme Disease United Coalition (yes we have lyme-infected deer ticks here in Nevada too!)
Add your comments below
|Wiggin and Dana Law Firm zuspected of Black Mag...||Jun 21||McGuire||2|
|Male Servant (Dec '14)||Jun 9||Hung hung||4|
|Waterford man begins three-year sentence for ho... (Feb '16)||Jun 3||Bobby D||5|
|Anyone Looking To Save Money On Internet?||May '18||MrDozier||1|
|Mom who lost pink house, court case hopes for b...||Apr '18||anonymous||2|
Find what you want!
Search New London Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC