SHARE THIS ARTICLE:
New IDSA Guidelines Effectively Stopping Treatment for Lyme Patients
SIGN PETITION HERE
The new IDSA guidelines published in October by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) are already causing patients to be denied treatment for chronic Lyme disease. The guidelines have recommended against any long term treatments, listing numerous specific antibiotic classes not to be given, listing alternative treatments and even supplements not to be offered to Lyme patients. Clinical discretion has been removed from treating physicians. We ask that you, your families, and friends across the country sign this petition immediately. Lyme treatment is at stake.
Petition Information: The petition on this website is for those 18 years and older to sign. Names and addresses will NOT appear on the internet but will be printed out with the petition when it is ready to be presented to the appropriate entity. LDA never sells names, nor shares them with marketers. The petition will be used in an effort to advance our cause at the appropriate time and will be kept private until that time. Remember, like many of you, LDA is all patients and families of patients ─ and all volunteer.
Other actions will be forthcoming. Please watch this site for details as our campaign for patients’ right to be treated unfolds.
 Statement from Pat Smith, President, Lyme Disease Association Historic Move by CT Attorney General to Investigate IDSA Guidelines Process Gives Hope to Thousands of Lyme Disease Patients HARTFORD, CT Nov. 16 ─ The national non-profit Lyme Disease Association (LDA), representing more Lyme disease patients than any organization in the United States, applauds Connecticut State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal for beginning an investigation into the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Lyme disease guidelines development process. In an unprecedented move, the Attorney General’s office filed a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) to look into possible anti-trust violations by the IDSA in connection with exclusionary conduct and monopolization in the development of the Lyme guidelines.
|