Western Blot
Bring testing into the 21st century
// Filed in: Lyme Disease Tests
How many times have you wondered why the flawed technology of the Western blot and the ELISA are still the standard test for Lyme? Hasn't anyone figured out a better, more sensitive test by now? New research is being done with twenty-first century technology, such as genomics and proteomics. More sensitive tests mean that greater numbers of people infected with borrelia would have a chance to begin treatment before Lyme enters the later stages. A person who tested negative for Lyme with the Western blot may actually test positive when tested for certain protein markers.
Pamela Weintraub, author of Cure Unknown: Inside the Lyme Epidemic, and senior editor at Discover Magazine, pulls no punches in a recent post about the IDSA's choice of panelists. The panel that has been assembled seems likely to merely reaffirm the old guard, and not consider new University-based scientific research.
"As someone who has traveled the country for six years interviewing these scientists to write my book, Cure Unknown, I can tell you unequivocally that many of the top researchers at the top institutions in the world do not think the original IDSA panel got it right," writes Pamela.
"Are recommended treatment protocols truly curing most of those with early, invasive borreliosis, as IDSA contends?"
"The answers won’t be found in the twentieth-century technology of the Western blot, by today’s standards crude yet still trotted out by IDSA as evidence absolute that they are right. (The Western blot for Lyme is so flawed that even its major manufacturer says he has found numerous "band" patterns more accurate than the one in use today.) Instead of relying on flawed 20th century technology, we must look to the science of the twenty-first century, including state-of-the-art genomics and proteomics that allows for the sequencing of every gene and protein involved in every stage of Lyme. With evidence of this calibre we won't have to fight over the truth: We will know what's going on."
Stay tuned for more LDRD interviews with top researchers, such as Dr. Eva Sapi of the University of New Haven. Dr. Sapi directs the graduate studies program for research into Lyme and other tick-borne diseases.
Pamela Weintraub, author of Cure Unknown: Inside the Lyme Epidemic, and senior editor at Discover Magazine, pulls no punches in a recent post about the IDSA's choice of panelists. The panel that has been assembled seems likely to merely reaffirm the old guard, and not consider new University-based scientific research.
"As someone who has traveled the country for six years interviewing these scientists to write my book, Cure Unknown, I can tell you unequivocally that many of the top researchers at the top institutions in the world do not think the original IDSA panel got it right," writes Pamela.
"Are recommended treatment protocols truly curing most of those with early, invasive borreliosis, as IDSA contends?"
"The answers won’t be found in the twentieth-century technology of the Western blot, by today’s standards crude yet still trotted out by IDSA as evidence absolute that they are right. (The Western blot for Lyme is so flawed that even its major manufacturer says he has found numerous "band" patterns more accurate than the one in use today.) Instead of relying on flawed 20th century technology, we must look to the science of the twenty-first century, including state-of-the-art genomics and proteomics that allows for the sequencing of every gene and protein involved in every stage of Lyme. With evidence of this calibre we won't have to fight over the truth: We will know what's going on."
Stay tuned for more LDRD interviews with top researchers, such as Dr. Eva Sapi of the University of New Haven. Dr. Sapi directs the graduate studies program for research into Lyme and other tick-borne diseases.
Lyme story airs!
// Filed in: Lyme Disease in the news
According to Brooke Landau, Lyme activist and TV news reporter, television stations listen and respond when they are deluged with requests from viewers to air stories about a specific topic. Viewers are their bread and butter. Please take the time to comment on the ABC website to let them know you appreciate the story they aired this morning about the documentary film, Under Our Skin. Here's my comment to them:
Thank you, thank you for bringing this growing epidemic to light. However, as many have already noted, the majority of people suffering with Lyme disease never saw a tick bite, and never had the bull's eye rash. In addition, the tests for Lyme have what one physician refers to as "coin toss sensitivity," meaning that if you toss a coin, you get results that are just about as accurate as using the ELISA or the Western Blot for testing positive. According to ILADs physicians I have interviewed for the Lyme Disease Research Database, the CDC has a long history of ignoring scientific evidence for the existence of chronic Lyme disease. Thanks to CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, the IDSA is now being forced to review its Lyme disease treatment guidelines. People who are suffering with Lyme due to misdiagnosis, under-diagnosis, and simple ignorance have long been forced to become their own health advocates, often at a time in their lives when they are extremely sick. I applaud you for airing this segment on the Lyme controversy, yet I am disappointed to see that your reporters did not bother to investigate the accuracy of the numbers of new cases of Lyme reported each year. As someone else commented, that 20,000 quote is hideously underestimated. Next time, I hope you have the courage to quote numbers that are closer to the actual truth.
In the Lyme documentary Under Our Skin, filmmaker Andy Abrahams Wilson (Open Eye Pictures) exposes the cruel dismissal that the medical establishment frequently gives people who are sick and suffering with Lyme. The film opened in April at the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC. Andy is featured in the LDRD's interview series.
Thank you, thank you for bringing this growing epidemic to light. However, as many have already noted, the majority of people suffering with Lyme disease never saw a tick bite, and never had the bull's eye rash. In addition, the tests for Lyme have what one physician refers to as "coin toss sensitivity," meaning that if you toss a coin, you get results that are just about as accurate as using the ELISA or the Western Blot for testing positive. According to ILADs physicians I have interviewed for the Lyme Disease Research Database, the CDC has a long history of ignoring scientific evidence for the existence of chronic Lyme disease. Thanks to CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, the IDSA is now being forced to review its Lyme disease treatment guidelines. People who are suffering with Lyme due to misdiagnosis, under-diagnosis, and simple ignorance have long been forced to become their own health advocates, often at a time in their lives when they are extremely sick. I applaud you for airing this segment on the Lyme controversy, yet I am disappointed to see that your reporters did not bother to investigate the accuracy of the numbers of new cases of Lyme reported each year. As someone else commented, that 20,000 quote is hideously underestimated. Next time, I hope you have the courage to quote numbers that are closer to the actual truth.
In the Lyme documentary Under Our Skin, filmmaker Andy Abrahams Wilson (Open Eye Pictures) exposes the cruel dismissal that the medical establishment frequently gives people who are sick and suffering with Lyme. The film opened in April at the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC. Andy is featured in the LDRD's interview series.