Page 3 - SCG 11-15.indd

Rules of the Road for Bicyles
I assume her opinion is based on her experiences with bicyclists on the road, but that opinion is absolutely the opposite I have formed from my encounters. From my direct and consistent experience, most bicyclists either don’t know that they are subject to motor vehicle laws, or simply do not care. When I encounter bicyclists, either solo or in groups, I am extra cautious, as it has been my experience that one or more of them will blithely do as they please in most traffic situations. I rarely find a cyclist who actually stops at a stop sign, turns from the proper lane, or for that matter, bothers to signal when they intend to turn.
clothes and using flashing lights, even in daylight. I applaud those choices; they help me share the road with them more safely.
Within the body of Debra Newby’s recent “Barrister Bits” column, she responded to a readers question about the legality of using a cell phone while riding a bicycle. While framing her response in the context of bicycles subject to the same laws as motor vehicles, she commented, “Do most bicyclists honor the rules of the road? Yes, in my opinion.”
Steve Tierra
Of course there a cyclists who obey the law, I do see them every now and then, but very rarely. I’m happy to share the road, but both cyclists and drivers would be a great deal safer if the cyclists acknowledged the motor vehicle laws by following them, not by ignoring them.
Someone with a bull’s eye rash is CDC positive and needs no confirmatory lab test. That patient should be treated without delay. People who contract Borreliosis due to B. miyamotoi do not, apparently, get a bull’s eye rash and do not test positive on the currently available tests, which even the CDC says are insensitive. I hope you do not require a positive test result before treating patients
On the bright side, I have seen an increase in the number of cyclists who are wearing bright fluorescent
LETTERS cont’d on page 4
11/15 - www.sonomacountygazette.com - 3
Lyme Disease
Thank you for your article on Lyme disease that appeared in the Gazette on Oct. 3, 2015.
Here are just a few of my more amazing encounters over the last few months. I have had cyclists (1) stop abreast of me on the right, at the stop light at Mueller & 116, and then, when the light first turned green, dash ahead and turn left directly in front of me, and another (2) race through a right turn –against the light at Occidental & 116 - merge on my right as I traveled south on 116, then sprint ahead, swerve in front of me completely across the highway to gain access to the bike path on the opposite side of 116, and yet another (3) while riding north on 116, approach a red light at Occidental & 116, slow but not stop, make a right turn, travel thirty feet, turn left across traffic, head back to the intersection, turn right and continue to travel north.
The Stanford study you mention actually found a density of 6 nymphal ticks per 30 meters of trail, not 100 meters. That equates to about a tick every 16 ft. of trail. That is quite high. The Press Democrat article misquoted the study, which is where I presume you got your information. Also, in Annadel they found 5/41 nymphal ticks positive for Borrelia. That is 12%. One in eight. They were looking for both Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia miyamotoi. They did not look for any of the other nine tick-borne diseases. So in Annadel, they found a nymphal tick infected with Borrelia about every 130 ft. of trail. No one has figured out how many ticks are infected when considering all the possible pathogens that are currently known.
The Sonoma County Health Dept. does indeed test ticks for Borrelia, but only B. burgdorferi and those tested are mostly adult ticks. In California, it is the nymphal ticks that are more highly infected. Furthermore, their test is an IFA test that is only positive if there are approximately 100,000 spirochetes ( the Lyme disease pathogen) in the tick. I got this information from Mr. Michael Ferris, Lab Director. Salkeld’s study used a PCR test which is far more sensitive.
Sonoma County has told me they plan to ”continue counting 8-10 cases per year”, suggesting that the case counting process is flawed (to put it kindly).