If you have not read the recent article by Brenda Patoine, "Guideline-Making gets tougher: Action by state attorney general over Lyme disease guidelines stirs debate, " I recommend you do. It is a good reminder that reporters can still do the in depth coverage of complex issues and hold their ground on reality based reporting.

GUIDELINE-MAKING GETS TOUGHER: ACTION BY STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL OVER LYME DISEASE GUIDELINES STIRS DEBATE

Promulgating clinical practice guidelines – already a laborious and often contentious undertaking – has just gotten a bit trickier.

The Lyme disease guidelines developed by the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) are a case in point.  Trouble began almost immediately after they were published in 2006, when IDSA promptly became the target of an antitrust investigation by the attorney general in Connecticut.  The guidelines outraged patient advocacy groups by saying there is “no convincing biologic evidence” for chronic Lyme infection and recommending against antibiotic therapy beyond short-term treatment of acute infections. Three advocacy groups – the New Jersey-based Lyme Disease Association, Connecticut-based Time for Lyme and the California Lyme Disease Association – took their concerns to Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.