Re: letters to the editor, anyone?

[Guest guest]

Absolutely! Just wrote one. One side journalism - Looks like Dr. Steere is

opening up his wallet to print his normal garbage. I am trying to find out why

their about 275 likes on this article. It is one sided and makes lyme patients

look like a bunch of quacks with minor pains and aches. I just wrote about a

page letter to journalists. Please write - BOMBARD- them to do the right thing

and follow with a corrected article.

[Guest guest]

Just when I was feeling better, this made me want to puke.

There are already a lot of good replies posted to this news article.

The Chicago Tribune is good for trying to drive out, put down, pull off

the market, etc.. anything thats helping

anyone using herbs/ oils/ chelators to help themselves or their family.

Who would even give a flip for this dog of a newspaper, or believe anything

they publish!! Basically its only worth, is for the outhouse.

Oh hi to the author of this article - since you maybe sneaking a peak at

what were all talking about. Go get a real job, other than working as

a spy for big Pharma. I hope Karma pays you a visit real soon.

Allie

>

> Absolutely! Just wrote one. One side journalism - Looks like Dr. Steere is

opening up his wallet to print his normal garbage. I am trying to find out why

their about 275 likes on this article. It is one sided and makes lyme patients

look like a bunch of quacks with minor pains and aches. I just wrote about a

page letter to journalists. Please write - BOMBARD- them to do the right thing

and follow with a corrected article.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Can't read the article. I'd get too angry and sad.

Connie

[ ] Re: letters to the editor, anyone?

Just when I was feeling better, this made me want to puke.

There are already a lot of good replies posted to this news article.

The Chicago Tribune is good for trying to drive out, put down, pull off

the market, etc.. anything thats helping

anyone using herbs/ oils/ chelators to help themselves or their family.

Who would even give a flip for this dog of a newspaper, or believe anything

they publish!! Basically its only worth, is for the outhouse.

Oh hi to the author of this article - since you maybe sneaking a peak at

what were all talking about. Go get a real job, other than working as

a spy for big Pharma. I hope Karma pays you a visit real soon.

Allie

>

> Absolutely! Just wrote one. One side journalism - Looks like Dr. Steere is

opening up his wallet to print his normal garbage. I am trying to find out why

their about 275 likes on this article. It is one sided and makes lyme patients

look like a bunch of quacks with minor pains and aches. I just wrote about a

page letter to journalists. Please write - BOMBARD- them to do the right thing

and follow with a corrected article.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Besides the Chicago Trib's piece there is this thing:

http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/local/324cc930-028a-11e0-91a8-001cc4\

c03286.html

<http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/local/324cc930-028a-11e0-91a8-001cc\

4c03286.html>

" A move by Winona Health officials to adopt national standards for Lyme

disease treatment is drawing the ire of area residents and state groups.

Physicians at Winona Health voted in October to stop accepting Lyme

disease patients who don't meet guidelines set by the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention and the Infectious Disease Society of

America, according to an internal memo obtained by the Daily News... "

Lyme Policy Wonk refutes everything in the Chicago Tribune's Attack

Piece.

LYMEPOLICYWONK: Chicago Tribune article. Is it journalism? Call it

what you will--f you are a journalist, is it sufficient to talk with a

number of people and then disregard half of what you hear? How about if

you only disregard all of the science supporting one side of a

scientific debate? If you replace the opposing side's science with

ad hominem attacks? Are journalists supposed to " choose sides "

in a debate? If you do, is it journalism or an editorial? What about

the obligation to tell a balanced story? One always hopes that

journalists will take their responsibility to inform the public

seriously and tell the complete story. These reporters did not.

In the attached paper, I outline the inaccuracies of the article and

the attention. The attachment includes footnotes for those interested.

This blog post leaves them out for an easier read. I have chosen to

focus on the science and do not address the many ad hominem attacks in

the article. Ad hominem attacks do not address the merits of an issue.

They distract, rather than inform, the issues of a debate.

There's little good evidence that 'chronic Lyme disease

<http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/health/diseases-illnesses/lyme-dise\

ase-HEDAI0000028.topic> ' exists. There is ample evidence if you are

willing to read it. There are 27 studies evidencing persistence in

humans that have been published in peer-reviewed journals. This

information was provided to the Tribune.

Yet doctors are treating it with drugs that put patients and the public

at risk. The risks of using antibiotics are quite low. Risk/benefit

determinations need to be made at the patient level. Patients whose

quality of life is significantly impaired may prefer the risk of

treatment over the risk of failing to treat an infection that has left

them without a job or unable to function in other serious ways.

Patients with chronic Lyme disease have a quality of life impairment

equivalent to that of congestive heart failure. No one would suggest

leaving patients with chronic heart failure untreated. The essence of

evidence-based medicine is a combination of the best available evidence

in conjunction with clinical judgment of the physician and the

patient's values and preferences.

But doctors around the country are telling patients with common medical

problems such as back pain

<http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/health/symptoms/back-pain-HEISY0000\

6.topic> , poor concentration and fatigue

<http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/health/symptoms/fatigue-HEISY000019\

..topic> that their ailments stem from a chronic form of Lyme disease

that can evade standard treatment and wreak havoc for years. Many

patients with chronic Lyme disease have central nervous system

involvement. Before vaccine money came into play in Lyme disease this

was widely recognized by the experts, including Dr. Steere who

co-authored an article that described " the most common form of

chronic central nervous system involvement [as] subacute

encephalopathy.. . . [which was difficult to diagnose] because " the

typical symptoms were non-specific. " The most common symptoms noted

included memory loss, depression, sleep disturbances, spinal pain,

fatigue and headache.

Three panels of experts from that organization, the Infectious Diseases

Society of America, and one panel from the American Academy of Neurology

came to the same conclusion: The diagnosis is suspect, and treatment

with antibiotics long-term is unsupported and risky. The IDSA had

three panels. The first panel issued guidelines in 2000 and the second

panel issued guidelines in 2006. Both panels were the subject of an

antitrust investigation by the Connecticut Attorney General that found

significant conflicts of interests, suppression of evidence, and

exclusion of differing viewpoints. 7 of the 8 members of the third

panel were IDSA members and those holding opposing viewpoints were

again excluded. The Attorney General noted a glaring voting

irregularity of this panel when it elected to sidestep a tough vote that

split 50/50. Members of the American Academy of Neurology panel also

served on the IDSA panel. As the Attorney General noted, it was not

independent. Call it what you will, but it isn't science, it's

politics. Truth in science is not determined by a majority vote of a

panel that excludes differing viewpoints.

Even Dr. Steere, the physician who discovered Lyme disease,

agrees. Dr. Steere has held conflicting viewpoints (see above) that he

has not reconciled.

The evidence against the effectiveness of long-term antibiotic therapy

is especially strong — supported by four randomized, double-blind,

placebo-controlled clinical trials. Evidence of Lyme treatment is

extraordinarily limited, consisting of only four NIH controlled

treatment trials with very limited samples (ranging from 37 patients to

78) and one non-NIH controlled trial. Compare this to mammogram trials

for instance, where more than 600,000 women have participated. The

results of controlled Lyme treatment trials are conflicting, three

found clinically significant improvement, two did not. Numerous

non-controlled trials have found improvement in treated patients.

Evidence consists of controlled and uncontrolled trials, clinical

expertise, and individual response to therapy. When evidence is

limited or conflicting, treatment options should be provided.

Such use of antibiotics poses a potential danger to the public, as some

of the drugs prescribed to chronic Lyme patients are society's

last-resort weapons against deadly bacteria. No one would suggest

that we not treat a patient with tuberculosis with antibiotics.

Infections require antibiotics to resolve.

The question is not one of evidence, but who is reading and interpreting

the limited, conflicting and emerging evidence. Patients who are

seriously ill want and need treatment options that restore their quality

of life. They cannot wait for treatment trials that may not occur in

their lifetimes. The IDSA has shown time and time again that the

interests of patients with chronic Lyme disease are not even on their

agenda. The two interests that are firmly represented in Lyme disease

are those of the IDSA and those of insurers who follow the IDSA

guidelines as a cost containment measure.

You can follow additional comments on Lyme policy at

www.lymepolicywonk.org <http://www.lymepolicywonk.org/> . You can

contact Lorraine , JD, MBA at lbjohnson@....

_____________________________

There is something nefarious going on in every article I've read,

especially the ones about the Va. Lyme Task Force. All of the articles

by Va. papers fail to mention the ILADS pov, and standard of care.

Everything is one sided.

Perch

>

> Just when I was feeling better, this made me want to puke.