Under Our Skin

Controversial views

The film argues that persistent infection with Lyme disease is responsible for a variety of debilitating symptoms. The film presents advocates of the position, including International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS). The position is at odds with that of major medical bodies including the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Academy of Neurology, who do not recognize "chronic" Lyme disease as a legitimate diagnosis. The film portrays the Infectious Diseases Society of America as "an organization riddled with conflicts of interest," and briefly discusses Richard Blumenthal's antitrust charges against the society.

Synopsis

The film follows six individuals, including major league ball player Ben Petrick who report chronic symptoms, which they attribute to persistent Lyme infection. The majority of the film is devoted to the storyline of these patients and their reported recovery. At the same time, the film presents advocates of long-term therapies for chronic Lyme disease and briefly presents the position of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA).

The second half of the film focuses primarily on state medical board investigations of Joseph Jemsek and Ray Jones, two physicians who prescribe long-term antibiotics for chronic Lyme disease. Jemsek was investigated based on the complaints of 10 patients who described "nightmarish experiences" as a result of his treatment; he was supported by a number of patients and Lyme disease advocacy organizations. The board found that Jemsek had departed from standard medical practice and had failed to inform patients that his treatments were unorthodox; his medical license was suspended with stay, allowing him to continue practicing medicine. Facing a lawsuit from an insurance company, Jemsek declared bankruptcy and closed his medical practice.

The final act of the film focuses on Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's antitrust investigation of the IDSA Lyme disease guidelines. Blumenthal issued a press release in May 2008 stating that his investigation "uncovered serious flaws" in the development of the IDSA guidelines, although Blumenthal declined to file any charges. Under pressure of mounting legal fees, the IDSA agreed to submit its Lyme disease guidelines to an independent review, which supported the scientific validity of the IDSA guidelines. The case was described in Forbes as "intimidation" of the medical community by the Attorney General, and in JAMA as an example of "elected officials advocating for health policies against the weight of scientific evidence." The film concludes with vignettes of two patients discussing their recoveries.

Critical reception

The New York Times described the film as a "polemic" and "inflammatory."Variety noted that the film "sides with those advocating unconventional treatments, [but] gives gatekeepers from Infectious Diseases of America [sic, actually Infectious Diseases Society of America] their say."

According to meta-critic review site Rotten Tomatoes, Under Our Skin is certified "fresh". As of January, 2010, the film has received 23 positive reviews and 5 negative reviews for a fresh score of 82%.

On November 18, 2009, the Academy Awards announced Under Our Skin as one of 15 semi-finalists in the Documentary Feature category from 89 qualifying documentaries. The film did not go on to receive an Oscar nomination.

Awards and honors

Finalist, 82nd Annual Academy Awards, Documentary Feature