monitoring for symptoms and taking a large dose of antibiotics within ~48 hours of symptoms is extremely effective.
I’m confused about this. Can you say more about what your threshold is for “extremely effective,” or why you think so? Wikipedia states: “People who receive recommended antibiotic treatment within several days of appearance of an initial EM rash have the best prospects.[106] Recovery may not be total or immediate. The percentage of people achieving full recovery in the United States increases from about 64–71% at end of treatment for EM rash to about 84–90% after 30 months; higher percentages are reported in Europe.[171][172] Treatment failure, i.e. persistence of original or appearance of new signs of the disease, occurs only in a few people.[171] Remaining people are considered cured but continue to experience subjective symptoms, e.g. joint or muscle pains or fatigue.[173] These symptoms usually are mild and nondisabling.[173]”
This leaves me thinking that even with rapid antibiotics, the debilitation per (infection that causes a rash) is significant.
My belief is that “long Lyme” is mostly fake. None of the symptoms can be objectively measured.
Imagine telling people that after you recover from the flu you might experience entirely subjective symptoms that mysteriously resemble the symptoms of getting older. What percent of people would claim to experience those symptoms?
Higher recovery rates are reported in cultures that talk less about long Lyme.
The people who do genuinely have long-term symptoms generally had knees that looked like grapefruits by the time they saw a doctor.
I’m confused about this. Can you say more about what your threshold is for “extremely effective,” or why you think so? Wikipedia states: “People who receive recommended antibiotic treatment within several days of appearance of an initial EM rash have the best prospects.[106] Recovery may not be total or immediate. The percentage of people achieving full recovery in the United States increases from about 64–71% at end of treatment for EM rash to about 84–90% after 30 months; higher percentages are reported in Europe.[171][172] Treatment failure, i.e. persistence of original or appearance of new signs of the disease, occurs only in a few people.[171] Remaining people are considered cured but continue to experience subjective symptoms, e.g. joint or muscle pains or fatigue.[173] These symptoms usually are mild and nondisabling.[173]”
This leaves me thinking that even with rapid antibiotics, the debilitation per (infection that causes a rash) is significant.
My belief is that “long Lyme” is mostly fake. None of the symptoms can be objectively measured.
Imagine telling people that after you recover from the flu you might experience entirely subjective symptoms that mysteriously resemble the symptoms of getting older. What percent of people would claim to experience those symptoms?
Higher recovery rates are reported in cultures that talk less about long Lyme.
The people who do genuinely have long-term symptoms generally had knees that looked like grapefruits by the time they saw a doctor.