Re: Bowen- was INTERESTING TV

[Guest guest]

ERIC:

We have the means and the methods to do what ever we want.

Testing Methods suck- and we can talk about that ad naseum.

.. which we have before.

The problem is reaching a consensus on standardization in a climate

of drug company/insurance company/FDA corruption- and the race to

make more big $$ and ignoring pretty much everything else.

If they're going to pour money into a research project, it's going to

be done with the idea to MAKE money- not validate Bowens findings

just beacuse it's the right thing to do, or set forth a new procedure

to identify some latent or chronic bacteria. - Where the money in

that?

That said- I make an exception for the Bill and Melinda Gates

foundation (recently given a TON-O-MONEY from Warren Buffett) and the

Foundation - Both of which are out side of the control

of the above formentioned institutions.

WHen you graduate- go work for the Foundation- they are not

restricted by the politcs that constrain the other institutions.

You could make a difference there..

Barb

>

>

>

> > I agree with you , LLMDs' priorities should be to identify,

> identify and identify the bacteria they are claiming to treat. If

they

> concentrated enough of their efforts on just that, if they worked

> closely with enough microbiologists, they would not have to work

with

> so many lawyers! As you say, shine pictures of glowing spiros, show

the

> medical boards results of PCRs obtained from various tissue samples

of

> infected patients and voilà! end of story.

>

>

> Yeah, its easy for us to criticise out here or underestimate

> establishment resistance, but this just has to be done by hook or

> crook.

>

> Scientists may lean pretty hard on prejudice sometimes, but they

will

> all bow to solid evidence if its widely repeated.

>

> The money thing may be an issue. Fallon has a lab. The lab is at

> Columbia where theres no shortage of equipment such as TEMs. It

still

> costs alot to run it; he needs a technician because he probably

doesnt

> have time to do much in the lab himself (it really can take time).

> Fallon can have done anything he wants in his lab - anything he can

get

> money for. If we gave him money or ILADS did or the MS society did

or

> the CFS society did, he could do anything he (or they) wanted. If

not,

> he can only do what NIH will fund him for. He may have submitted

grants

> to NIH which are like the things we are talking about, but which

they

> turned down.

>

> Maybe we could put something together about, say protein

confirmation

> for the bowen assay (which I think the UK authorities have said is

not

> acceptable so far), and find a researcher with a lab, and then try

to

> raise money the same way they do for the LLMD legal defenses. Maybe

not

> every researcher would want to take on sponsorship coming from

public

> fundraising; I dont know. It might seem unpresitigous or something.

>

> The thing is, I'm not sure you would even need any " serious " money

to

> just have a few labs try to just DO the Bowen and publish that. All

you

> do is get blood, apply the antibody, done. It might cost more than

one

> might think, but still not alot. You need access to a lab

> fluoromicroscope. I dont see why this much hasnt been done.

>

> That would be a doorway to proving bacterial causition, which if it

is

> true and can be proven, is a doorway to $1B a year in spending to

> figure out how to kill them. Or more. The current and (especially)

> projected annual costs of Alzheimers are completely astronomical.

>

> " The Alzheimer's Association estimates the annual cost of the

illness

> by 2050 will reach $375 billion, about what the United States now

> spends for national defense. "

>

> I assume theyre talking 2006 dollars, but I'm not sure. Our entire

> nation budget is now $2.338 trillion. So fighting alzheimers is a

huge

> priority right now.

>