Madison Area Lyme Support Group

WSJ Says Chronic Lyme Was Once Dismissed But Doctors Are Coming Around – I Disagree

FILE_7701.pdf  Article Here

Chronic Lyme Disease Was Once Dismissed. More Doctors Are Coming Around.

Newer trials are starting to track Lyme patients and investigate potential treatments

By Brianna Abbott Jul 20, 2025

(See link above for article)

_____________

Why This Research Won’t Help Patients One Iota

By Alicia Cashman, Madison Lyme Support Group, Wisconsin

7/24/25

Summary of WSJ article:

• A 63 year old Massachusetts woman was told in 2015 the root of her odd, flulike illness was likely Lyme disease.  (This website has hundreds if not thousands of such stories)
• For the next decade she cycled through ‘unproven’ treatments and got push-back from doctors. (They must push the ‘not proven’ issue to keep us all from getting extended antibiotics which would make a majority of us better)
• When MIT starting recruiting ‘people just like her,’ she felt validated.
• The article then states ‘long COVID,’ is what is bringing chronic Lyme more credibility.
• True to form and right on cue, long time player – Dr. John Aucott of Johns Hopkins, who has studied chronic Lyme for TWO decades but hasn’t budged the needle an inch, repeats the narrative that ‘long COVID’ has given chronic Lyme more ‘acceptance.’ (You must understand that there’s a lot of grant money for those who ignore the fact the COVID shots are likely behind ‘long COVID. It must also be stated that ‘long COVID’ looks exactly like other post-viral syndromes.) Vaccine injury gets ZERO grant money because our own government and researchers are beholden to Big Pharma. Vaccines are the cash cow of research.
  • The cat is let out of the bag on the final page of the article when it’s stated that the study includes acute Lyme and ‘long COVID’ participants.
    • First, notice that the reason we are hearing the clanging mantra of ‘long COVID’ is because it’s a part of the study. A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
    • Second, notice that they are ONLY looking at ACUTE Lyme – something that’s been studied ad nauseam.  This research once again omits the sickest patients who never have any research done on them.
  • Thirdly, the cat continues to be let out when it’s stated they are looking for whether a molecule left behind could be driving inflammation.  Right there – they are admitting their bias that this is not a chronic, persistent infection that could be cured or benefitted with anti-microbial treatments.
• The author is oblivious to the fact that Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome (prolonged symptoms for at least 6 months after treatment) doesn’t include a HUGE subset of patients who were diagnosed and treated late.  This continued regurgitated ignorance is allowing research to be skewed in favor of chronic Lyme only affecting 5-20% of patients – which is a much smaller deal than 40-60%, when those diagnosed and treated late are included.
• The article repeats a falsehood: that in order to get Lyme one NEEDS to be bitten by a bacteria-carrying tick.  Congenital Lyme has been proven, and there is much to indicate  sexual transmition as well.
• The reason they ignore anything but ticks is because then they can state their next falsehood, which fits the ‘climate change‘ narrative, which has been proven false by an independent tick researcher.
• Third falsehood: a 2-4 week course of antibiotics cures the disease.
• Fourth falsehood: blood tests can help determine if a person has antibodies against the pathogen. Seronegativity has been a big part of the Lyme debate from the beginning.
  • Part of the reason for this is the fact one of the most specific bands for Lyme was taken out of testing at the Dearborn, MI conference because it interfered with vaccine development.
  • Another reason is the fact that arbitrary levels of antibodies have been set, keeping a majority of those infected from ever testing positive.
  • Yet another reason is the fact that there has been a concerted suppression of microscopy  which is considered the gold standard for syphilis diagnostics. Similarly to the attacks on ivermectin and HCQ for COVID, ‘the powers that be’ continue to attack any test other than the CDC 2-tiered test for not being ‘FDA approved,’ even though the CDC test is not ‘approved’ either.
• Fifth falsehood: there are no treatments that have been proven safe and effective after the initial antibiotics. My husband and I were in intense treatment for over 5 years using multiple antibiotics, among other things, simultaneously. Without this life-saving treatment I wouldn’t be writing this article today.
• Proving that nobody’s coming around to accept Lyme Disease – read, “Gaslighting and Cults: Our Baffling Relationship With Tick-Borne Diseases,” written this past January, 2025.

This study won’t help chronically infected patients.  Don’t expect anything from this.  It’s the same crap, different day.  

For more:

• https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/09/25/why-should-we-care-about-lyme-disease-a-colorful-tale-of-government-conflicts-of-interest-probable-bioweaponization-and-pathogen-complexity/
• https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/02/22/why-mainstream-lyme-msids-research-remains-in-the-dark-ages/
• https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2025/05/29/a-case-for-chronic-lyme-a-medical-perspective/