Rapid Responses to:

EDUCATION AND DEBATE: Susan O'Connell Fortnightly review: Lyme disease in the United Kingdom BMJ 1995; 310: 303-308 [Abstract] [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Negative serology in chronic Borreliosis

Edward L McNeil   (14 August 2001)

Negative serology in chronic Borreliosis 14 August 2001
Edward L McNeil, Consultant Bowen Research Institute, Florida Send response to journal: Re: Negative serology in chronic Borreliosis	Review of the results of diagnostic tests on over 1500 patients who had adequate histories and number of signs and symptoms to make the diagnosis of Lyme Disease (Borreliosis), showed that less than 50% had received confirmation by serologic tests. Those that did have positive tests became negative as the disease progressed or during a recurrence after a remission acquired after being treated vigorously with a variety of multiple antibiotics. As many tested have been shown to have coinfections with either Ehrlichiosis or Babesiosis with the Borreliosis, (some patients having all 3 organisms from the same or multiple tick bites), it is little wonder that the immunity system is deprived of its ability to give positive serology results. Most of the patients in the study were from areas of the USA but 16 were from various counties in England and Scotland. A physician who disregards the diagnosis of a tick-borne disease, that urgently requires treatment, because some tests are negative, is doing a suffering patient unnecessary harm. Our ethics dictate that we should do no harm.