With all due respect to Dr. David Goodfriend, Loudoun County’s health department director, there are differing opinions on how long it takes a tick to transmit Lyme disease, how to diagnose Lyme disease and how to treat it.

By not referencing the spectrum of opinions in your article, “New program targets Lyme disease” in the July 21 edition, many people will continue to believe Lyme disease is a hard-to-get, easily treatable disease – and for some, it is. For those who never go outside into their yards, play in the park, or have an indoor/outdoor pet, then perhaps Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases are hard to get. But did you know that birds, rabbits, mice and other rodents – including those cute chipmunks – carry the ticks that carry the disease?

The deer-reduction program is one important step in Lyme disease prevention, but it does very little if people do not rid their yards and pets of ticks.
As for the rate of transmission, a quick Internet search reveals a spectrum of opinions on how quickly the disease can be transmitted from tick to human. A health department source from Connecticut (the birthplace of Lyme disease) states anywhere from 8 hours to 24 hours –  not a clear-cut 36 hours, as your article stated.

Additionally, Lyme disease may be easily curable when treated appropriately and quickly. But did you know that many people never know they have been bitten and less than 50 percent never get the bulls-eye rash. If you are lucky enough to get the bulls-eye rash, take a picture! It may be the only proof you have, because the tests given for Lyme, particularly the first go-to test ELISA, are not reliable. The Western Blot, a more specific test, is also not always reliable, depending on when the blood is drawn, where the bacteria is in its life cycle, etc. A negative blood test is more likely than a positive one, and doctors and Lyme disease sufferers across the country are fighting for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to recommend Lyme diagnosis and treatment based on clinical observation vs. a positive blood test. The CDC’s highly controversial diagnostic guidelines are extremely restrictive and require a very high standard of positive infection to be met. Because of this, the CDC recommends treatment only if there is a positive test or rash, and the treatment may not be long enough or intense enough to kill all the bacteria. Add this to the proof that for some, the disease takes years to treat with expensive IV antibiotics. You’ve got yourself a widespread controversy rife with ego and profit.

I am not a physician, but I personally know two families whose family members are fighting Lyme disease with all their strength, time and money. These sufferers are sick beyond imagination, and it’s articles like the one in the Loudoun Times-Mirror that downplay the fast rise and seriousness of the disease in our area. Even the CDC admits that Lyme is 90 percent under-reported.

If you do nothing else, please consider an article that reveals the full controversy – with doctors and researchers on all sides of the debate – so your readers can make their own decisions and won’t just believe Lyme disease is hard to get and is easily treatable. In my experience, it’s the exact opposite. It’s easy to get, and once you have it, it may take many doctors, many months or years, and many medicines to treat it effectively. And please remind your readers to do daily tick checks and learn to remove ticks correctly to help prevent disease transmission.

Janice Bittner

Round Hill