Ueber Hautroetungen
Autor: Marlynch
Email: marlynch@aol.com
Datum: 10.10.1996
Forum: sci.med.diseases.lyme
In article <325BDDE1.1E33@interaccess.com>, Audrey <audreyj@interaccess.com> writes: >Am looking for a address and phone number for Dr. Joseph J. Burrascano, >Jr. in NY. I sent it directly to you. BTW, Dr. Burrescano was recently on a local TV program. He was very interesting! One thing he said was that according to a recent New York survey of people with Lyme, 62% of the people did *not* have or notice the bull's eye rash, only 38% did! He repeated this several times because he knew that the viewers would think it was backward. He didn't give any more information about the origin of the survey. (Does anybody know?) He also mentioned that LUAT can be done on joint and spinal fluid as well as urine, mentioning that LUAT tests for more strains of borrelia than Western Blot. There is now a commercial lab that can do skin biospsies but he didn't mention who it was. Mary
Autor: BCLyme
Email: bclyme@aol.com
Datum: 13.10.1996
Forum: sci.med.diseases.lyme
In article <53kdja$8bf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, marlynch@aol.com (Marlynch) writes: >One thing he said was that according >to a recent New York survey of people with Lyme, 62% of the people did >*not* have or notice the bull's eye rash, only 38% did! He repeated this >several times because he knew that the viewers would think it was >backward. He didn't give any more information about the origin of the >survey. (Does anybody know?) Was he specifically referring to the "bullseye rash" leaving open the possibility that another 20-40% or so have rashes without the central clearing? Brian
Autor: Marlynch
Email: marlynch@aol.com
Datum: 15.10.1996
Forum: sci.med.diseases.lyme
In article <53rhai$hrb@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, bclyme@aol.com (BCLyme) writes: > >Was he specifically referring to the "bullseye rash" leaving open the >possibility that another 20-40% or so have rashes without the central >clearing? > >Brian I don't know, he kept calling it "the rash", (he was not pronouncing it with a long "e"). 38% of people surveyed got the rash. My guess is that he was speaking about the bull's eye rash. He did discuss atypical rashes but it did not seem to be in connection with the survey. Whether atypical rashes were considered depends on whether the survey addressed that issue. That's why I wanted to know if anyone knew what NY state survey he was referring to. The survey was not performed by Burrescano. BTW he also explained why you can have a negative PCR on the actual tick and still get LD. Depends on when the tick was removed. If it was early in the feeding process, the disease is still in the tick. So you can have a positive tick and not get LD. But if the tick is removed late in feeding, the disease can be out of the tick and in your blood. So the tick can test negative, and you still get LD. Then apparently just before letting go of your skin, the tick is still sucking your blood but now your blood is infected in that area. So then the tick can be positive AND you have LD. And to confuse the issue further, the tick can be infected but the infection can be limited to its respiratory system, so it won't transmit the disease to us (he got this from Burgdorfer). But if tested, the tick will be positive. As long as I'm going on about what Burrescano said, he thinks that instead of having "Lyme-like disease" as opposed to "Lyme Disease", we should call them the "Lyme Diseases". He said that relapsing fever had the same problem. Instead of having different names or strain numbers attached to relapsing fever, they are called the "relapsing fevers" and the same should be done with Lyme. Mary