In the Lymelight: Law and Clinical Practice Guidelines

Susan J.D. Ronn


South Med J. 2009;102(6):626-630. 

In This Article

Additional Information

For additional information on Lyme disease, see the ILADS and IDSA websites at: and

A comparison of the two clinical guidelines can be conducted online. Available at:, using the compare link.

For a look at the Lyme debate through the eyes of physicians and patients who challenge the mainstream view that chronic Lyme does not exist, see Under Our Skin, a new documentary film by Open Eye Pictures.

See also: Weintraub P. Cure Unknown: Inside the Lyme Epidemic. New York: St. Martin's Press; 2008.

See also: Johnson L. Lyme disease: two standards of care. [ILADS website] Feb 2005. Available at:

For a discussion of the inherent problems involved in the current process of producing evidence-based guidelines, as well as solutions for strengthening the approach in order to improve patient care, see: Snierman AD, Furberg CD, Why guideline-making needs reform. JAMA 2009; 301(4):429. Advocating reform of the guideline process, the authors point out that different guideline panels review the same disease and come to different conclusions. (These problems are not limited to Lyme disease.)

A new version of federal legislation about Lyme disease was introduced the last week of February by New Jersey Congressman Chris Smith. It calls for $100 million over five years for Lyme disease research, prevention, physician education and the formation of a federal Advisory Committee. A Senate bill is expected to be introduced shortly. See the new federal Lyme bill: HR-1179. Lyme and Tick-Borne Diseases Prevention, Education & Research Act of 2009.


Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our Commenting Guide for further information. We reserve the right to remove posts at our sole discretion.
Post as: