Is Lyme Disease recognized in the US?
I know for example: there was a guy who got bitten by a tick in Australia and yet doctors still think "nothing is wrong" just because Australia doesn't recognize Lyme Disease since their argument is "no scientific proof that ticks in our country transmit the bacteria" which sounds stupid when there are cases of people having Lyme Disease there.
And he's not the only one: as a woman shared the symptoms he had, but Australia FOR SOME reason is still in denial as their counterargument sticks on "NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT OUR TICKS HAVE IT" so she spent money on getting the results in another country where Lyme Disease is officially recognized paid from her own pocket.
In comparison:
- is Lyme Disease recognized in the United States?
- If so, how common is it amongst the population?
I live in the US, and I had Lyme when I was a teenager. Simple blood test confirmed it, I was prescribed antibiotics and it cleared up nearly instantly. No one told me it didn't exist.
Similar experience for me. Developed the typical bullseye rash on my calf after being bit and went to the doctor. He didn't even bother with tests to confirm, just prescribed me antibiotics based on the rash alone and it cleared up. Was sick and tired for a few days and that was that.
Fun fact: The disease is named for Lyme, Connecticut, USA. That's where it was first identified as a unique condition.
It's common enough in the northeast and north-central US that my public schools taught everyone basic prevention and symptoms as part of the regular curriculum.
Do you have an article about the case you're talking about?
There is a difference between Lyme disease and chronic Lyme disease. My guess is that this case has something to do with that difference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyme_disease
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_Lyme_disease
There's a news segment about it from Australia
So they don't explicitly mention "chronic" Lyme disease in the video, and I couldn't find any other articles from looking up the names mentioned, but it does sound like that's what is being talked about here.
What I would be curious about is if these patients got the antibody test. If they didn't, that seems like a relatively easy policy fix. Bacteria can spread to other countries and go undetected, and the test isn't that invasive compared to the peace of mind it would give patients. Same
However if they did get the test and it came back negative, then it gets more complicated. Doctors don't want to put someone on treatment for something that can't be detected. Every medication has side effects and you would end up harming someone without evidence of a benefit. Where it gets messy is when people go for "diagnosis" or "treatment" abroad.
I did actually find this from last October
https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-11/australian-government-response-to-the-senate-community-affairs-references-committee-report-access-to-diagnosis-and-treatment-for-tick-borne-diseases.pdf
Yes, it's recognized in the US. Not always quickly and accurately, I've known several people who lived with it for years before a doctor finally figured it out.
(Pure personal anecdotal, not data-backed) I suspect a generation of doctors were trained only to look for a red rash in the shape of a bullseye target on the patient's skin and not to run blood tests until a bullseye is seen. People with Lyme don't always get the bullseye rash or sometimes it's in an area not easy to detect it (on scalp, covered in hair). Hopefully there continues to be better awareness and diagnostics.
It's not super common where I live (middle of the US). I've been bitten by ticks many times but never contracted Lyme. My state advises saving the tick for 30 days after it bites you. If you have any symptoms, your doctor's office can arrange to have it tested. If it tests positive, you get tested and then treated if needed and also the an official report goes to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), which is a national-level public health agency.
Unfortunately, the CDC is under the Department of Health and Human Services, which is now run by RFK Jr. I wouldn't be surprised if that moron were to advise tanning one's butthole as treatment for Lyme.
I watched the news segment linked in here and I'm neither a doctor, nor a healthcare administrator, nor an Aussie: this does sound rather daft. You could contract the disease while being abroad even if all Aussie ticks were proven to be clean. Which is at least in doubt based on two local cases they interviewed. I'm guessing this is a very small number of people getting royally screwed by the system.
On a semi-serious note, would the Australian healthcare system also refuse to treat a person with Ebola based on the fact that the virus is known to be of African origin?
My dad got lyme's disease when I was a kid. Mother diagnosed it using our girl scout handbook. It was taken care of by doctors after that so I'm guessing they agreed?