The Situation in Minnesota
SOURCE: Minnesota Lyme Action Support Group
1282 cases of Lyme Disease (LD) were reported to the Minnesota Department of Health in 2008, a 450% increase in 10 years, ranking Minnesota 8th in terms of total cases in the United States.1 This does not include statistics for co-infections such as Babesiosis, Anaplasmosis, and Ehrlichiosis.
These figures are thought to be under reported a factor of 10, meaning that as many as 12,820 people in Minnesota were infected in 2008. Additionally, the CDC Surveillance Case criteria, which are defined as a physician observed characteristic Lyme rash or specific joint, neurologic or cardiac abnormalities with a positive ELISA serum test followed by a positive Western Blot test,2 are very strict; thus, the number of reported cases represents only the tip of the Lyme disease iceberg.
According to the Center for Disease Control 5 to 9 year olds are the highest age group affected.3
For those infected who meet the criteria the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) recommends a short course (3 to 4 weeks) of antibiotics.4 5
Complications
The problem is that physicians and patients have been trained to look for the Bull’s-eye rash but this classic form of the rash is see by less than 30% of those infected, and the recommended ELISA blood test and Western Blot tests are known to inaccurate and will falsely report as ‘negative’ for a significant number of infected people.6
The IDSA guidelines do not recommend treatment for these infected people with false negative results and they get sicker. They may have a variety of symptoms simultaneously, including fatigue, severe headaches, severe arthritis, cognitive problems, generalized pain and heart problems. As these symptoms often worsen, many patients are no longer able to go to school or work; some are confided to a painful existence at home. The cost to society is tremendous.7 8
The restrictiveness of the IDSA guidelines and the panel process was investigated recently by the Attorney General’s office of the State of Connecticut because the guidelines were being used to deny care. His office found that the guidelines were created through a very flawed process.9
The good news is that these people can be helped by physicians who use their clinical judgment to assess the patient’s history and symptoms to make a diagnosis; such physicians often utilize longer courses of antibiotics.10
However, health insurance companies, citing the restrictive IDSA guidelines, may deny coverage for extended antibiotic treatment.11 They have also been known to bring complaints regarding this type of treatment to state medical boards, threatening the physician’s medical license, even though their patients are improving. 12
Support for Physician and Patient Rights
Connecticut 13, Rhode Island 14, and California 15 have enacted legislation to protect the rights of physician’s to treat LD patients according to their clinical judgment, allowing patients to receive the care that they need.
We need your help to support Minnesota State Bill S F Number 163116 to allow doctors and patients the right to fight Lyme today. Please contact your legislator today.
FOR REFERENCES:
http://www.mlasg.com/files/Lyme_Situation_in_MN.pdf
