Review: Under Our Skin (2009)

[Mark R. Leeper]

                         UNDER OUR SKIN
                (a film review by Mark R. Leeper)

     CAPSULE: Writer and director Andy Abrahams Wilson
     looks at the spread of and effects of Lyme Disease
     in the United States.  He examines the controversy
     of whether chronic Lyme Disease actually exists
     and looks at the financial and political interests
     aligned in not recognizing the disease.  We meet
     some of the sufferers and the doctors who risk their
     careers to treat the disease.  The film is certainly
     not unbiased, but allows those who do not believe
     in the disease to give their reasons.  Rating:
     low +2 (-4 to +4) or 7/10

As recounted in UNDER OUR SKIN, Lyme Disease is a bacterial
infection that can result from the bite of a deer tick.  Ticks are
a reservoir for a spiral-shaped bacteria called Borrelia.  In its
early stages it can cause rashes, joint problems, and symptoms like
influenza.  In most cases antibiotics can cure the disease in a
matter of weeks.  But cases of the disease have spread across the
continental United States, with some cases in all states with the
exception of Hawaii.  Making matters worse, there may be a much
longer-term chronic Lyme Disease.  Whether chronic Lyme exists or
not and what are its symptoms is the subject of intense
disagreement.  That controversy is the topic of
director/writer/producer Andy Abrahams Wilson's documentary UNDER
OUR SKIN.  The case for the existence of chronic Lyme Disease seems
a strong one, based on this documentary, but this review will not
take sides.

In many (alleged?) cases chronic Lyme Disease is painful and
debilitating.  Frequently it is associated with fever, extreme
joint pain, muscle pain, headaches, and stiff neck.  Complicating
the matter is the fact that diagnostic tests have very poor
accuracy--around 50%.  The infection rate is growing and
widespread.  But the medical community claims that there is not
enough evidence.  The film examines this controversy and many of
its aspects.  Wilson makes a case that the insurance industry is
fighting the recognition of chronic Lyme for what are claimed to be
medical reasons but which are also very strong financial reasons.
If chronic Lyme is accepted as a serious disease, insurance
companies will be obliged to carry the financial burden of
treatments.  The insurance companies are interlocked with the
medical community that has a hard time finding evidence of the
disease and is denying what evidence is available.  Symptoms
claimed to be arising from chronic Lyme are being attributed to
other causes including psychosomatic problems.

It is hard to deny that the people who believe they are victims of
this disease are suffering, and the cause appears to be chronic
Lyme.  The film tells us the story of six victims of the disease.
Doctors are treating patients do seem to be getting positive
results.  However, these doctors also face losing their license to
practice and also face very large lawsuits.  One such doctor is
Dr. Charles Ray Jones, who has treated 10,000 children for Lyme
Disease.  He was charged by the Connecticut State Medical Board
with unprofessional conduct.  A legal defense fund funded in large
part by his patients was established to pay his legal fees.

Some issues probably should have at least been mentioned.  If Lyme
Disease is distributed across the country, it must be fairly common
in Canada also.  If Canadian doctors accept the chronic form
exists, that would be a powerful endorsement for the filmmakers'
point of view.  If they themselves doubt that the chronic form
exists, they do so for medical rather than monetary reasons.  Dr.
Jones's treatments appear to be effective, but to what extent does
that prove his diagnosis?  One cure can work for many different
causes.

This is a good science documentary about a problem that does not
get much press.  It even manages to have a hopeful ending rooted in
recent discoveries about Lyme Disease.  This film raises disturbing
questions--not just those related to the disease itself but also
broader questions of the conflicts of interest across the insurance
and medical community.  These issues need to be understood and
possibly remedied.  I rate UNDER OUR SKIN a low +2 on the -4 to +4
scale or 7/10.

Film Credits: <http://us.imdb.com/title/tt1202579/>

What others are saying:
<http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/under_our_skin/>


					Mark R. Leeper
					mleeper at optonline.net
					Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper