The battle you are fighting is attacking the wrong parties. If a doctor does not know that a surveillance case definition is not the same as a diagnosis, I suggest getting a new doctor. Surveillance definitions are not intended to capture all possible cases, there is no way to do that. Surveillance definitions; however, MUST be standardized and no disease acts as such that every case fits neatly but the intention of surveillance is to detect patterns of disease. Most case definitions use a combination of symptoms and laboratory tests to classify a "case". Surveillance definitions should never be used be used to determine the appropriate course of treatment. Again, if your doctor is doing this, get a new doctor. I suspect that what you are all calling "chronic" Lyme Disease is really long-lasting symptoms that are secondary to having had an acute infection of Lyme. The agent that causes Lyme disease is likely not still circulating in your blood stream. If this is the case, then the term "Chronic Lyme Disease" is a misnomer. You are attacking the wrong parts of our healthcare system on this. What you should be doing is advocating for research and funding for the development of treatments that can aid folks in overcoming the long-terms symptoms that have developed as a result of a Lyme Disease infection. You should be encouraging physicians to stay on top of the latest information or refer you to someone that is more familiar with Lyme and its secondary symptoms. Forget about CDC and case definitions - they have important purposes, just not what you are looking for.