NOT Recommended in Florida
List of Florida Doctors Not Recommended
Lemire Clinic- Ocala, FL- October 2015- Changing to a very limited concierge practice. Refers the more complex FL Lyme patients up north for treatment.
Dr. Kirti Kalidas- Orlando, FL- Not willing to deal with special needs patients (disabled).
JFK Medical Center, Palm Beach County, FL- Letter To Inform- Click Here
List on Internet- It appears many of the doctors on this advertising list (linked below) are members of certain organizations that don't believe in treating Lyme disease until the symptoms are gone, or believe there is such a condition as "chronic Lyme disease". For example- these doctors have stated the Lyme disease tests are accurate- and in reality they are not at all reliable. The doctors following this line of thought are generally NOT recommended by patients, Lyme organizations, support groups or Lyme treating doctors.
Mayo Clinic- Jacksonville, FL- Hundreds, if not thousands of Lyme patients have reported very unsatisfactory results when going to the Mayo Clinic(s). The disease was missed totally, the disease was "dismissed" as causing problems and/or no treatment was offered even in in some of the most obvious, severe cases. The Lyme Community has a long standing saying- "HOLD THE MAYO" - for that reason.
Link to the NOT recommended list: http://www.lifescript.com/doctor-directory/condition/l-lyme-disease-fl.aspx
The Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) and the American Academy of Neurology (AAN)- specifically their Lyme Disease Guidelines- were investigated by the Connecticut Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal (currently US Senator).
After a lengthy investigation, in May 2008 the AG stated:
"The IDSA's 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel undercut its credibility by allowing individuals with financial interests -- in drug companies, Lyme disease diagnostic tests, patents and consulting arrangements with insurance companies -- to exclude divergent medical evidence and opinion.”
“The IDSA portrayed another medical association's Lyme disease guidelines [American Academy of Neurology] as corroborating its own when it knew that the two panels shared several authors, including the chairmen of both groups, and were working on guidelines at the same time. In allowing its panelists to serve on both groups at the same time, IDSA violated its own conflicts of interest policy.”
“IDSA sought to portray a second set of Lyme disease guidelines issued by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) as independently corroborating its findings. In fact, IDSA knew that the two panels shared key members, including the respective panel chairmen and were working on both sets of guidelines a the same time -- a violation of IDSA's conflicts of interest policy.
The resulting IDSA and AAN guidelines not only reached the same conclusions regarding the non-existence of chronic Lyme disease, their reasoning at times used strikingly similar language. Both entities, for example, dubbed symptoms persisting after treatment "Post-Lyme Syndrome" and defined it the same way.
When IDSA learned of the improper links between its panel and the AAN's panel, instead of enforcing its conflict of interest policy, it aggressively sought the AAN's endorsement to "strengthen" its guidelines' impact. The AAN panel -- particularly members who also served on the IDSA panel -- worked equally hard to win AAN's backing of IDSA's conclusions.
The two entities sought to portray each other's guidelines as separate and independent when the facts call into question that contention.
The IDSA subsequently cited AAN's supposed independent corroboration of its findings as part of its attempts to defeat federal legislation to create a Lyme disease advisory committee and state legislation supporting antibiotic therapy for chronic Lyme disease.”