A: Not currently. But nothing is stopping readers from printing out individual chapters and stapling them together to make a wonderfully inexpensive gift for friends, family, and those in the medical community. Check that: printer ink is woefully pricey. Maybe stick to friends and family. Alternatively, the audiobook is free—all 27 hours of it—which makes for an excellent companion on long drives, sleepless nights, and other occasions when you need something to completely rewire your understanding of modern medicine.

A: Maybe. For the time being it will remain free for the world to read. I don't need the dollars, I need change. All of those suffering from undiagnosed or undertreated Lyme disease need change. The medical establishment's attitude surrounding Lyme disease needs change. I also don't want anyone excluded from reading this memoir because they can't afford to.

A: Directed to scientists worldwide, The Letter is 90 pages of peer-reviewed science from the past century with hundreds of citations. It makes the formal scientific case that Lyme disease is the root cause of most chronic illness. It is designed to be evaluated section by section and stands alone from the memoir—though the memoir documents how every conclusion in The Letter was reached. Both are free to read and share.

A: The Letter includes a step-by-step AI evaluation guide as an appendix—breaking the argument into 13 distinct sessions with suggested bridging questions between each. The recommended approach: feed The Letter to your preferred AI research tool one session at a time rather than all at once. Feeding it in bulk triggers a reflexive "grand unified theory" skepticism before the AI has engaged with the individual arguments. Section by section, it's a different conversation. Scientists and researchers are encouraged to use the same prompts to stress-test the findings independently. If you find something that breaks the argument, that is the most important evidence in medicine right now. Please share it.

A: Yes and no—and the distinction matters. Chronic Lyme disease, as debated in medical circles, typically refers to persistent symptoms after standard antibiotic treatment, a diagnosis the mainstream medical establishment has largely refused to recognize. What SDBR documents is both broader and more specific: that Lyme disease has been spreading sexually and congenitally for thousands of years, that the majority of infections are never detected, and that the bacteria have been misidentified as autoimmune disease since the 1950s. The chronic Lyme advocates have been right that something is wrong. The scale of what's wrong turns out to be considerably larger than anyone argued.

A: Lyme advocates have been saying, correctly, that the disease is underdiagnosed, undertreated, and dismissed. What SDBR adds is the mechanism—specifically, Borrelia burgdorferi's unique dependence on manganese rather than iron, which explains why women are disproportionately affected, why certain cancers are rising in younger generations, why mental disorders are more common in men, and why carbohydrate-restricting diets and GLP-1 medications work across such a wide and otherwise inexplicable range of conditions. The advocates laid the cairns. This memoir followed them to where they led.

A: Three fatal assumptions, made in sequence, sealed the deal. In the 1950s, frustrated by slow progress on rising illness rates, scientists coalesced around the theory that the body must be attacking itself giving birth to autoimmune disease. By the time Lyme was discovered in the 1970s and its spirochete identified in 1981, autoimmune disease was considered settled science. Nobody went back to look. The third assumption—that Lyme spread only by ticks—eliminated it as a suspect in conditions where no tick was present. Each assumption was reasonable given what was known at the time. Together they created a feedback loop that faulty data has been reinforcing ever since. It’s not that scientists are stupid. They’ve been working with a corrupted dataset for 70 years. That’s not a character flaw. It’s a tragedy.

A: Please do. Both are free, both are designed to be shared, and the PDF of The Letter is specifically formatted for easy distribution. Send it to your doctor. Send it to your senator. Send it to that friend who’s been sick for years and told repeatedly that nothing is wrong. The more people who read and stress-test these findings, the faster the reckoning arrives. The only request: share it as written, without selective editing. The argument is designed to be evaluated whole, not cherry-picked.

A: Not currently, though a produced audio version is planned as a future addition. In the meantime, the PDF is compatible with most screen readers and text-to-speech applications.

A: The LSD—yes, the abbreviation is unfortunate, no, it does not involve anything scheduled—is the working name for the dietary approach documented in Chapter 52 of the memoir. The core idea: Borrelia burgdorferi spirochetes get their energy from carbohydrates and sugars. Deny that fuel source consistently, and the bacteria slowly weaken. Ketogenic diets have shown broad effectiveness across conditions linked to Lyme for exactly this reason, though researchers haven't understood why until now. The LSD is not a cure. It's a bridge—one of the best available interventions while the medical community catches up. Consult your physician before starting any dietary change, particularly if you have diabetes, kidney disease, or are pregnant.

A: Mainstream recourse remains frustratingly limited—few primary care physicians or infectious disease specialists are currently willing to appropriately evaluate or treat the illness. That is changing, but not fast enough. In the meantime, the concluding chapter of SDBR and the final pages of The Letter outline the most promising current interventions: ketogenic diets, metformin, and GLP-1 medications, all of which can be discussed with your existing medical provider without mentioning the L-word if that makes the conversation easier. Finding a Lyme-literate physician (LLMD)—credentials vary widely, so vet carefully—remains the most direct route to formal evaluation and treatment. SDBR and The Letter aim to make that conversation unnecessary by changing the conversation entirely.

A: As of the memoir's conclusion, the answer is: improving, cautiously and genuinely. Days after beginning the Lyme Starvation Diet, changes were already apparent—swelling in his ankles mostly gone, snoring reduced, heart rate responding normally to exercise again, psychosis staying away even during extended antibiotic breaks. He is still in a wheelchair. Full recovery is not a promise, it’s a goal. The epilogue, which will document what happens next, hasn't been written yet. That's not avoidance—it’s honesty. Science requires evidence, not hope. When there’s enough of the former, the latter will follow. Stay tuned.

A: No—and please don’t. Nothing in Sit Down Before Reading or The Letter constitutes medical advice, and the findings documented here will need to be confirmed by the broader medical community before becoming standard of care. Work with your existing care team. Do not stop medications without medical supervision. That is not what this memoir is asking of anyone. What it is asking is considerably harder: that you read it with an open mind, share it with people who need it, and demand that the scientists and physicians you trust take it seriously. For more, see our disclaimer.