Lyme is the new HIV/AIDS

Western medicine seems to be very confused and lost when it comes to Lyme disease. Medical doctors claim that there is so much we don’t know about it.

The problem is that the medical community is, from my experience, about 20-30 years behind science.

In the world of holistic medicine, we know a lot more about the treatment of Lyme and its co-infections.

It is ludicrous to believe that giving antibiotics for months is a good thing for the patient.

But medical doctors are still using this approach, which does not make sense ☹

A few years ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that Lyme disease is much more common than previously thought, with over 300,000 new cases diagnosed each year in the United States. That makes Lyme disease almost twice as common as breast cancer and six times more common than HIV/AIDS.

The main reason for this is Lyme is sexually transmitted!

Holistic doctors have known this for years.

Unfortunately, I have seen several cases of this. One spouse is perfectly healthy, then get Lyme. A few years later, the other spouse has the same symptoms and eventually is diagnosed with Lyme.

The root cause of the Lyme situation is it is very hard to diagnose. Actually, some MDs do not believe in Lyme at all. I’ve had some patients where their insurance would not cover Lyme treatment because they did not believe in it.

But it is not hard to see that Lyme is real. People affected by it, like I used to, are debilitated by this bacterium. It can be pretty bad!

We know that serology can be falsely negative, especially if a patient has taken antibiotics, yet IDSA (Infectious Diseases Society of America) says that a negative assay “essentially rules out the diagnosis of Lyme.”

I agree it makes it far less likely, but I hate categorically dismissing the possibility, especially in someone with exposure in a high-risk area.

As I’ve mentioned previously, diagnostics are dismal, and the amount of government spending on surveillance and diagnostics pales in proportion to their impact both on patients’ lives and economic impact.

Johns Hopkins estimates the costs of Lyme to be up to $1.3 billion a year, not including indirect and societal costs.

Yet the NIH and CDC spend just $768 and $302 for each new case of Lyme disease, according to the HHS report to Congress.

There is considerable controversy over tests. I understand that tests need to be validated and that some “home-brewed” tests had too many false positives—saying normal healthy people had Lyme.

IDSA states tests should use “clinically validated assays.” But current assays miss up to 30% percent of cases—an unacceptably high percentage if you are a patient.

Further, because antibody tests may be positive for years, there is no good way to know if someone has been reinfected by a second tick.

Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA, CEO of, expressed her concern that FDA-“cleared” tests are not verified for accuracy and that requiring tests be approved or cleared will “leave out innovators.”

Here we get into more differences between recommended treatment regimens. For acute Lyme with rash, IDSA recommends ten days of doxycycline or fourteen days of a penicillin-type drug. NICE (UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) recommends 21 days, and ILADS (the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society) 4-6 weeks.

NICE says, “Consider a second course of antibiotics for people with ongoing symptoms,” using a different antibiotic. They add, evidence to guide treatment “is of poor quality, out-dated and often based on small studies.”

NICE says to no exclude Lyme disease by negative tests if it is strongly suggested by the clinical assessment.

For arthritis, IDSA recommends 28 days, as well as an additional course if the arthritis is refractory, concurring with NICE more than elsewhere.

It is ridiculous to believe that you can get rid of Lyme with antibiotics.

I have seen patients who had been on antibiotics for years and still had Lyme and its associated symptoms.

Medical Lyme doctors will never get rid of Lyme and they do not start looking at the totality of the picture.

What I mean is Lyme is one aspect of the disease. We need to look at mercury and aluminum poisoning, which is always associated with Lyme. Those heavy metals are like a magnet for Lyme and coinfections.

Then, we need to look at parasitic infestations, yeast overgrowth, the biofilm communities, viruses, like EBV, etc.

All those factors are to be considered to eliminate Lyme. That is why the medical approach has failed and will always fail.

I view the NICE guidelines as less dogmatic and more focused on the individual patients. For example, NICE recommends doing a Western blot (immunoblot test), despite an initial negative ELISA when there is clinical suspicion of Lyme disease

NICE also decided that longer courses of 21 days of treatment should be offered, if clinically indicated, because of their concern at low cure rates in some studies and the lack of clear evidence for shorter courses.

Dr. Sam Donta, a former Boston University professor, and physician, experienced in treating Lyme disease, says that we should regard treating Lyme similarly to tuberculosis, where 18 months of antibiotics used to be the standard treatment.

“If you’ve been sick for a year or two, a three-month trial (of antibiotics) is inadequate,” Donta said, questioning the data regarding duration of treatment. Coming back to our lack of decent tests to guide therapy, Donta added, “In the absence of direct tests, clinical observations are important.”

But like we just saw, this approach does not make sense. I have seen hundreds of patients with Lyme, and none of them got any improvements with years of treatments with antibiotics.

The opposite is true. Unfortunately, they got worse.

If you think about it, wiping out the gut flora with antibiotics could not possibly be a good thing.

ILADS’ recommendations are at the opposite end of the spectrum from IDSA’s, emphasizing patient preference. This is appropriate up to a point, but assumes that the physician a) is knowledgeable of risks and benefits b) can and will communicate the risks of prolonged antibiotic therapy to patients and c) doesn’t have significant conflicts of interest.

This last point is huge. Prolonged IV antibiotics, in particular, can be quite profitable for physicians and clinics and raise my alarms. Many patients and physicians also appear to underestimate risks. Since my practice included seeing patients with complications of antibiotics and IV catheters, including sepsis and death, I never ever use or recommend antibiotics.

There are companies that provide natural treatments for Lyme. As a matter of fact, those herbals are so powerful that we can get rid of Lyme and associated issues in months! Most of my patients start feeling better on my protocol just a few weeks on it.

I also cringe at the label “Lyme literate” practitioner, which implies that those who disagree are uneducated or behind the times. Most of those doctors actually are pro-antibiotics, which is an approach that does not address the root cause of the infections.

I recently came across an article that states that ticks have to be attached for 48 hours to transmit Lyme. This is completely false! As soon there is a tick on your skin, it could potentially transmit Lyme or other pathogens.

If you have any chronic health issues (cancer, Arthritis, Parkinson, autoimmune issues, etc.), you may have Lyme. But do not give up, there is hope that you can be helped!

God bless y’all 😊

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *