Heterodox and Orthodox Discourses in the Case of Lyme Disease: A Synthesis of Arguments

• Published in: Qualitative health research Vol. 29; no. 11; pp. 1661 - 1673
• Main Authors: Hinds, Kate, Sutcliffe, Katy
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.09.2019; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
• Subjects: Chronic Disease; Chronic fatigue syndrome; Chronic illnesses; Discourse analysis; Discourses; Evidence-Based Medicine; Fatigue; Health technology assessment; Humans; Idiopathic; Legitimacy; Lyme disease; Lyme Disease - diagnosis; Lyme Disease - pathology; Medical diagnosis; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Qualitative research; Sick Role; infectious; qualitative; chronic; illness and disease; experiences
• ISSN: 1049-7323; 1552-7557
• DOI: 10.1177/1049732319846170

In this article, we examine the arguments made by authors of published academic articles concerning the debates surrounding chronic Lyme disease (CLD). CLD is an example of a contested condition and shares problems of legitimacy with other medically unexplained conditions such as chronic fatigue syndrome. We use a critical discourse analysis (CDA) approach to understand the arguments of the authors to establish the legitimacy, or not, of a CLD diagnosis. This enabled us to make sense of the nature of the stalemate between patient groups and advocates of the medical establishment, as performed by authors of academic articles. In this article, we bring together the arguments to explain the polemical debate and to support accounts that avoid the impasse to give us greater insight into the experience of chronic illness.