Quote Originally Posted by Traveler View Post
Perhaps I should clarify, I didn't say the Southeast (including TX and FL) had anything other than a low risk, which the map clearly shows low risk in most of the Pacific and Southeastern States, with some moderate areas in the Pacific States. That was what I was referring to.
and i didnt say that lyme disease only existed in the northeast. i stand by my statement. aside from a small area in MN (worth noting) your map shows that lyme disease is more or less concentrated in the northeast.

as is often the case in these discussions, i think the difference in viewpoint is one of possibility versus commonality or likelihood. lyme is POSSIBLE in lots of places. it is very common or very likely in very few though. nearly anything is POSSIBLE. i could inadvertently carry an infected tick on my person to some foreign country that has never seen a single case of lyme ever and help to cause the first one they've ever seen. it is possible, but so? statistically speaking, if one wants to assess the risk of contracting lyme in that country, it is meaningless. i think you're seeing "low risk" and reading it more like "average risk" etc. low risk, to me, means yes we have seen lyme cases there, but you are overwhelmingly unlikely to contract lyme in these places. if you factor in that we are risk averse and tend, i think, to exaggerate risk at least slightly very often, that something is offically designated "low risk" says quite a bit about just how very low the chances that one would contract lyme in that region are.

i am interested in what is likely or common. lyme disease is not likely or common in the vast majority of the US. your map does not disprove this, it proves it.