Controversy over chronic Lyme disease

Recently, whether or not the Lyme disease can be categorized within chronic diseases has aroused controversial argument in medical community.  Lyme disease, according to medical dictionary, is defined as an inflammatory disease characterized by a rash with joint swelling and fever; caused by bacteria carried by the bite of a deer tick. (William, 2008). The key point of this controversy goes to how long Lyme disease can last and whether it is easily diagnosed, treated and cured.

There are basically two views on the subject: One is stated by the Infectious Disease society of America (IDSA) that there is no convincing biological evidence for the existence of chronic Lyme infection and that long-term antibiotic treatment of "chronic Lyme disease" is unproven and unwarranted.  The other view is held by the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS) that current Lyme testing is largely inaccurate and likely to miss patients with chronic and ongoing infection, and that long term antibiotic treatment is indicated for those patients with chronic symptoms due to the persistence of the spirochete. (The school of medicine of Stanford, 2011)

Personally, I’m apt to agree with the view that ILADS holds which argues that chronic Lyme disease does exist and focuses on the alternative reasons for the chronic symptoms like ongoing infection. Compared with the IDSA’s point, this view is supported by the chronic Lyme patients and the physicians, which make it more reality-based—“We attest to the fact that we do much better when treated beyond those 4 weeks of antibiotic treatment. Our subjective experience is supported by a body of peer reviewed scientific research.” stated by physicians treating Lyme disease. As well, significant scientific literature can be found to support that the Lyme bacterium can survive this standard treatment.(Canadian Lyme disease Foundation, 2011) Therefore, with the patients’ real treatment experience together with supportive scientific literature review, I argue that chronic Lyme disease does exist and that we should protect the right of physicians to treat Lyme patients in the effective way that has works effectively for so long a time. 

The video is retrieved from:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74APsNq7NIQ

Webster's New World™ Medical Dictionary, 3rd Edition (2008) http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=13334

Canadian Lyme disease foundation (2011

):http://www.canlyme.com/nycontroversy.html

Stanford, school of medical (2011)

http://chronicfatigue.stanford.edu/infections/tick-borne-controversy.html 

Cardio Fuel——another magic pill for chronic disease?

Nowadays, it’s all too easy for us to get the health information from the internet. But the credibility of the information you get really matters. Because fake or unreliable information can be potentially harmful to our health. Here’s an example of health information that lacks credibility.

First，there is no reliable evidence to support that the Cardio Fuel can help treat  chronic diseases (no experiments provided and just by presenting the personal experiences is not enough). Second,since this statement comes form a supplement selling website, there is a potential bias that if you believe it and then they can gain the financial benefits. Third,the supplement selling website itself is a reliable source.(a journal article is more reliable)  Fourth, no time was provided in this statement, so we are not sure about its timeliness.  Fifth, according to that statement, this supplement can treat patients who suffer from various chronic diseases, like high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes and so on, which make it sounds like a magic pill that can help treat all the diseases and that doesn't make sense. 

To counter the statement above, here are some reliable information from the Science-based medicine website with author and time offered:

“First, it is not possible to directly measure ATP in a human being under normal clinical conditions, so any claims about this must be an inference from markers of ATP metabolism, or a guess.” (Peter, 2010) So, the Cardio fuel with ATP ingredients can treat so many chronic diseases doesn't make sense.

“A PubMed search for “CardioFuel” turned up nothing.  Of the ingredients claimed to boost energy, d-ribose is the one with the most literature—literature which is not favorable. ” (Peter, 2010) and this statement indicates that there is no evidence to support the authenticity that Cardiofuel can treat chronic diseases. 

As a whole, to search for reliable information about the health information, we should pay attention to its source, date, evidence and the person who says it. Only by confirming the credibility of the health information, can we really benefit from it. 

References:

Crisler J.,Cardio Fuel 

Retrieved from: http://www.i-supplements.com/cardiofuel.html

Lipson P., Feb 11,2010, Cardio Fuel—another magic pill

Retrieved from: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/cardiofuel-another-magic-pill/#comments