justinekno Posted September 23, 2010 Report Posted September 23, 2010 The other night when I couldn't sleep (most nights these days!) I started thinking of my son's (and mine) recent Lyme diagnosis. We are going on the assumption that he received Lyme in utero bc I was not properly treated before he was born (had bulls eye rash but only got 10 days of Doxy). I know Lyme can be transferred in utero but any way that a child can be born with the antibodies bc the mother has them from a past Lyme infection and therefore the child doesn't really have Lyme? As you can tell, I am not exactly proficient in the medical science field!
smartyjones Posted September 23, 2010 Report Posted September 23, 2010 sorry - i don't have an answer for you but find it a very interesting concept -- your son could show antibodies but not have an infection -- like he got a vaccine from you but not the lyme bacteria? interesting! i did ask our integrative MD an impossible question of if there are people who are bitten by an infected tick but do not develop lyme disease. of course, there's no way to know but not everyone who is exposed to H1N1, strep, many other infections etc develop a problem and infection from it. could lyme be the same?
MichaelTampa Posted September 23, 2010 Report Posted September 23, 2010 It is an interesting question. Don't they say, generally, babies get antibodies for fighting various bugs from breast milk? Seems like the same idea. As far as what I have heard, though, is some people think that the baby will not develop lyme antibodies if their mother has it because the baby's immune system will not consider it foreign. I'm not sure how you would reconcile that with how people talk about the other bugs.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now