Chronic lyme is a vague term that usually refers to people who have already been treated, but continue to have symptoms, and may not test positive. It's a grabbag of stuff.
I have heard this claim before but I couldn’t follow the logic, genuinely would like to understand your perspective.
So “late untreated borreliosis” is a “real thing” but if someone gets borreliosis, gets treated, yet their symptoms persist (this scenario is what people usually mean by the term chronic Lyme) then that is NOT a “real thing”?
Does this mean that treatment is 100% effective or that if it didn’t work, then it wasn’t borreliosis to begin with?
