Eric:
You are under the erroneous impression that this is a debate about Lyme; it isn't. It is a propaganda scuffle.
A few years back, in Canada, there was a very nasty, little man who went around telling people that the holocaust never happened. He mixed truth with fantasy and many vulnerable people were confused, or worse, sucked in by his version of events. What made matters worse was he was a high school teacher and so had access to young susceptible minds. Luckily the authorities sent this mad man to jail for spreading hate.
This story is not, unfortunately, extraordinary because the world has too many such pathetic creatures. However, what I personally found most abhorrent was how people jumped to this man's support, saying that his freedom of speech had been violated. These people only served to muddy the waters, and the original evil was all but lost in the fray. Namely, that a demented mind had propagated a wrong, hateful, and personal agenda.
This is an extreme case, and I am not suggesting you are motivated by the vitriol that was this nut case’s calling card. In fact, I do believe that you care, in your own way. What I am suggesting is that you are taking advantage of the emotions of others. You state many things, yet you lack the proof to back up these claims. You call down the other voices of Lyme because they do not agree with yours. It is a grand conspiracy perpetrated by the evil insurance companies. (much gesticulating of hands in the air)
I am not a fan of insurance companies, but in the Lyme debate, I can understand their reticence to be obliged to pay for a treatment that is contentious and seemingly has no end. You deliberately confuse the issue by introducing spurious evidence, which is a disservice to real bona-fide sufferers.
Eric, I wouldn't know how long a person, who really does have lyme, should take a course of antibiotics for, and neither do you. Neither do the many experts it would seem. The voices that urge caution in the Lyme debate do not emanate from a single source. There are scientists and physicians around the globe that have concerns about the way Lyme is dx and treated; as there are those who believe the contrary. The answer; no doubt, lies somewhere in the middle. In some cases lyme is over-diagnosed and in others, under-diagnosed.
Again, you seek to flummox people when you suggest that I endeavour to dissuade them from seeking cure. Nothing could be further from the truth, and you know it. Or do you? I am only balancing out the equation so that sufferers of BFS can make informed decisions, rather than emotional ones.
BTW, how's the bomb shelter coming?
Cheers,
Basso