I am a biology teacher 48 years of age in pretty good physical shape. I spend a great deal of time in the outdoors on the south shore of Long Island. I have been a host to at least 100 deer ticks over the last 20 years or so and never had any signs of Lymes. I decided to get checked during a routine blood analysis and came up positive. I was assured that it was a definite positive. I probably have been infected for a long time and most likely more than once.
How common is it to have a natural immunity to Lymes?
Could it still pose a threat in the long run as I age?
Please post any information on this.
Thanks,
J. Marino
Follow Ups:
Re: To Robert McFerran; On Lyme
Posted by Robert McFerran on January 07, 1999 at 23:38:58:
In Reply to: Re: To Robert McFerran; On Lyme posted by James C. Marino on January 07, 1999 at 20:14:21:
James,
You need to find out what your physician means by "a definate positive". Usually an antibody specific test is run. If you are making antibodies it simply means you have been in contact with ticks carrying the specific organism that sometime develops into Lyme disease. The antibodies (whether they are IGA, IGM, or IGG) give some indication as to whether the 'infection' was recent or long ago. The number of antibodies will also give some example of how effectively that your immune system is handling this.
I'm curious as to what course of treatment your physician recommended? I would perceive a course of antibiotics to only be appropriate if your IGA antibody titers are VERY high.
If after an extended course of antibiotics how will you protect yourself from getting re-infected next spring?
You asked:
How common is it to have a natural immunity to Lymes?
The organism responsible for Lymes is a relatively weak one -- which means that we should all have a 'natural immunity' sufficient to protect us. Unfortunately with each successive generation we are losing our 'immunological reserves' to the point where this previously rather innocuous organism is thriving -- and in the process creating a disease state in it's host.
Could it still pose a threat in the long run as I age?
Yes it could. But then again the bacteria responsible for pneumonia or the bacteria responsible for peptic ulcer, or the e. coli ever present in your food might get you first :)
The reason that I mention these three is that researchers are perplexed by the fact that there are LOTS of folks that can be exposed (and indeed even infected) with these micro-organisms and remain asymptomatic (they don't get sick).
What I'm suggesting is that we are in a constant battle with all sorts of organisms that are commensal when our immunity is intact and become parisitic when our immunological barriers are sufficiently lowered. This is the way it's been for mankind for the last 4 1/2 million years. Only now are we becoming aware of this phenomenon due to our rapidly becoming maladapted to our environment -- and with it our rapid loss of immunity.
Bob (who is not a doctor)
Re: To Robert McFerran; On Lyme
Posted by Walt Stoll on January 09, 1999 at 11:50:03:
In Reply to: Re: To Robert McFerran; On Lyme posted by James C. Marino on January 07, 1999 at 20:14:21:
Dear James,
Wellness is the only universal protection from clinical Lyme Disease yet determined. Your positive titer only says that you were exposed and your immunity prevented the infection. Congratulations!
Were I you, I would use this 'site to learn more about "wellness" and continue to incorporate it into your lifestyle.
Walt