[at-l] Lyme vaccine warning

[orangebug74@yahoo.com (Orange Bug)]

Pretty good rant. I believe I was taken to task for just this issue
about 2 years ago when I suggested folks pass on the Lyme vaccine as we
knew early on of possible autoimmune problems that appear to be
semi-limited to certain HLA groupings.

Occasionally, we learn that the latest technology is not such a great
advance. Lyme disease is a good example of how prevention followed by
early intervention is still the best technology. The drug company has
defended the vaccine, stating (accurately) that only the vaccine has
been shown to prevent Lyme disease - not clothing, not tick removal,
not DEET, nothing. Of course they don't let you know that these other
technologies haven't been subject to the same sort of double blind
testing. Who would want to spend the money on such tests? Would such
tests on humans pass ethical standards?

I've turned down free vaccine. The choice of the Lyme vaccines belongs
to the person and their doc. No person should accept a treatment
without learning of risks and benefits, and no doc should provide a
treatment without providing informed consent (not just a piece of paper
to sign). It is a great idea to learn about the hazards and the tools
at our disposal in our sport. 

Bill....

BTW, I doubt we will ever see specificity of tests for rickettsial
illnesses ever get beyond ~80%, nor accuracy in a similar range.

--- FLATers@webtv.net wrote:
...
> Why do I repeat this info. from time to time? Because NO ONE told us.
> WE didn't hear about it. WE werent informed. Now WE want YOU and
> everyone
> we can reach with the message that early treatment is the key!!!!
> Yes,
> there is also a vaccine, but I won't be taking it. Not till its more
> like 95% accurate! 
> Sorry if it seems I'm ranting, but I wanted you to know what we know.
.

__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/