The Lyme Disease Network receives a commission from Amazon.com for each purchase originating from this site. When purchasing from Amazon.com, please click here first:
Dedicated to the Bachmann Family
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual
donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system
of Web services, please click on the "Make a Donation" button to the left, or send your donations to:
The Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey
43 Winton Road
East Brunswick, NJ 08816 USA
In the United States, your donations are tax deductible.
posted
STATE MEDICAL BOARD State Disciplines Doctor At Center Of Lyme Disease Dispute
By ARIELLE LEVIN BECKER The Hartford Courant
February 17, 2010
HARTFORD - The state medical board on Tuesday voted to discipline Dr. Charles Ray Jones, a New Haven pediatrician known for his support of a controversial form of Lyme disease treatment.
The discipline a $10,000 fine and a four-year license probation during which Jones' practice will be monitored will not take effect until the board signs the decision, which is expected to happen next month. It will mark the second time in three years that the board has disciplined Jones, 80.
Jones and his supporters say he has been targeted by health authorities because of how he treats Lyme disease. State health officials say the allegations against Jones are about patient care in general, not Lyme disease.
Jones was accused of violating medical standards in the cases of four children. For one, a 4-year-old girl, Jones allegedly ordered tests, diagnosed Lyme disease and another illness, and prescribed medication all before meeting or examining her. For two other children, Jones allegedly ordered lab tests to confirm Lyme disease without physically examining them.
A hearing panel for the Connecticut Medical Examining Board found that Jones violated the standard of care in those cases because he failed to consider other diagnoses and prescribed antibiotics for the 4-year-old without an exam or medical history.
The panel dismissed allegations involving the fourth child.
Jones said before the vote that he would appeal a ruling against him. "I haven't done anything wrong," he said.
Before the medical board voted, Jones' attorney, Elliott Pollack, described the case as the result of complaints by "disgruntled" parents, some involved in divorces.
"No patient complained here," Pollack said. "No patient was harmed here. All patients were helped here."
More than a dozen of Jones' supporters attended Tuesday's board meeting. Jones is considered a hero to those who believe that Lyme disease can be a chronic condition that requires extended antibiotic therapy. They say that many doctors and tests miss the condition, leaving patients to suffer.
The mainstream medical community has rejected many of the long-term Lyme arguments, saying that such cases are rare and that doctors who diagnose it often overlook other causes of the symptoms.
Dr. Richard Bridburg, who was chairman of the hearing panel, said the panel excluded testimony about the debate over Lyme disease.
"For us, at least, this issue was, perhaps because of the size and busyness of Dr. Jones' practice, we thought that he takes shortcuts," like ordering tests without doing physical exams or considering other diagnoses, Bridburg said.
Jones previously was accused of diagnosing Lyme disease and prescribing antibiotics to two out-of-state patients he had not examined or met. The medical board fined Jones $10,000 in 2007 and placed his license on probation for two years, but Jones appealed. A judge ruled that the state Department of Public Health had not sufficiently proved one of the violations that the board found, and ordered the case returned to the board to determine what discipline Jones should face. That determination has yet to be made.
posted
"The mainstream medical community has rejected many of the long-term Lyme arguments, saying that such cases are rare and that doctors who diagnose it often overlook other causes of the symptoms."
ummm...thanks "mainstream medical community", first off, it's not quite that rare.
Secondly, I went to "mainstream medical community" for a whole year prior to getting proper treatment and "they" overlooked other causes, not my Lyme Doctor who has finally brought me back to normal health.
Thanks for failing us "mainstream medical community".
LLMDs like Jones are the heros here.
Posts: 72 | From Raleigh, NC | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If mainstream medicine was doing this right, Dr. Jones would not still be practicing at his age and he would not have a 6 month waiting list. People are voting with their feet.
Mainstream medicine is an idiot. They punish the people who help the most apparently.
As far as I can see, state medical boards do more harm than good.
Posts: 7051 | From Not available | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged |
Dr. Richard Bridburg, who was chairman of the hearing panel, said the panel excluded testimony about the debate over Lyme disease.
"For us, at least, this issue was, perhaps because of the size and busyness of Dr. Jones' practice, we thought that he takes shortcuts," like ordering tests without doing physical exams or considering other diagnoses, Bridburg said.
HUH?
#1: "this issue was, perhaps" Was it or wasn't it? #2: "we thought that he takes shortcuts" You thought or you KNEW? #3: "like ordering tests without doing physical exams or considering other diagnoses" Dr. Bridburg has obviously never had a kid with Lyme Disease. If he did he would KNOW that Dr. Jones does a complete exam at every visit and certainly does consider other diagnoses.
How much exactly is it costing the taxpayers for Bridburg to use words like "perhaps" and "we thought" in an attempt to go after Jones? And, how come no one called this guy on it?
The best revenge is for Dr. Jones to live long enough to see these other "doctors" get their due.
Posts: 214 | From where ticks flourish | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dilly...yes, the CT board would issue a complaint against Dr. Jones for ANYTHING, including him sneezing in the wrong direction.
And if they couldn't nail him on that, they'd manage to file a complaint alleging that his jogging suits contained nylon or polyester which because they aren't "green" threaten the environment. Where does the insanity end?
Why do these a$$holes get away with filing charges using words like "perhaps" and "we thought" ??? Isn't law about facts?
Tiny moral midgets...that might be giving them a bit too much credit.
This whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. God bless Dr. Jones and other docs who have even half his courage.
Posts: 214 | From where ticks flourish | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, just couldn't resist. This thing with Dr. Jones has got to stop. It is ridiculous.
Had to send a letter to the editor of the Hartford Courant. Doubt it'll be published, but here it is:
I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around what transpired on February 17 regarding the Connecticut Medical Examining Board's decision to "discipline" Dr. Charles Ray Jones, the only pediatrician in the world who dares to treat children who are sick because of tick-borne disease.
Pending approval by the CME Board, a $10,000 fine will be levied against Dr. Jones, but more disturbingly, he will be placed on a four year period of probation and his practice will be "monitored."
Hopefully the CME Board will come to its collective senses and cast its vote accordingly. Arielle Levin Becker states the following in her article of February 17:
"Dr. Richard Bridburg, who was chairman of the hearing panel, said the panel excluded testimony about the debate over Lyme disease.
'For us, at least, this issue was, perhaps because of the size and busyness of Dr. Jones' practice, we thought that he takes shortcuts,' like ordering tests without doing physical exams or considering other diagnoses, Bridburg said."
WHAT?
Is the CME now basing its decisions on statements such as "this issue was, perhaps" and "we thought he takes shortcuts" and "like ordering tests without doing physical exams or considering other diagnoses"
???
Aren't legal decisions still based on FACTS, and not words and phrases like "perhaps" and "we thought"?
Dr. Bridburg, I would like you and the CME to answer the following:
#1: regarding the statement: "this issue was, perhaps"
Was it or wasn't it? The word "perhaps" has no place in a legal decision. You need to clarify this statement, and in fairness, Dr. Jones and his attorneys ought to be able to respond in kind.
#2: regarding the statement: "we thought that he takes shortcuts"
Dr. Bridburg, you thought or you KNEW? Thinking and knowing are vastly different in legal terms. If you merely "thought" Dr. Jones took shortcuts, you are entitled to your opinion. If you KNOW for a fact that Dr. Jones took shortcuts, you ought to be able to provide proof of same in a legal proceeding. Do you have such proof? Dr. Jones does not take shortcuts. I'd be willing to take the stand on that, as would many other parents. How many parents do you need to testify regarding this issue?
#3: "like ordering tests without doing physical exams or considering other diagnoses"
On what facts are you basing this statement? Please elaborate on how you reached this conclusion. If you are unable to do so, your statement is moot and ought to be withdrawn. And, again, Dr. Jones' attorneys ouught to be given the opportunity to respond in kind. Again, I'd be willing to take the stand on this, as would other parents. Please publish how many parents you need to testify regarding this issue.
Dr. Bridburg, it is apparent that you and your colleagues on the CME have been fortunate enough to not have a desperately sick child. I wish I was a member of your club. But, I am not. I am among many parents whose children have been severely ill.
Thankfully I did not agree with diagnoses presented early on, like "depression" "chronic fatigue syndrome" and "I don't know" My children are on the path to recovery. Their journey began with Dr. Jones. He is a treasure to parents like me.
I am sickened when I think of how this man who has always stood up for what he believes in (Dr. Bridburg...did you know Jones was a friend of and marched with MLK during the civil rights movement?) has become a pawn in the IDSA/ILADS controversy.
Have you or any of your colleagues actually sat down and spoken with Dr. Jones? Perhaps if you did, you'd have a different perspective.
Then again, this really isn't about sitting down and having a conversation with Dr. Jones to explore his experiences and trying to see things through a new lens, is it?
#4: Finally, for the record, please state exactly how much this case against Dr. Jones has cost the taxpayers of CT.
So many have lost their savings, their homes and their jobs due to medical expenses from Lyme Disease and coinfections, whether you and your colleagues want to acknowledge it or not.
So, please provide an update as to how the hard-earned money of CT taxpayers is being spent in the state's thirst to prosecute Dr. Jones. And, consider whether this money could be better spent elsewhere.
Posts: 214 | From where ticks flourish | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tincup
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829
posted
Alana..
Thank you. So nice to see you care so much and you understand the issues. Really, thank you!
We are working hard to help but as you know.. and I can see your passion coming through clearly...
These jokers fighting Dr. Jones are *&^%$^&*.
I gotta stop here. I need some sleep and your letter just riled me up again... and I don't need that at this late hour.
And if a letter can get me riled up at this point... it must be a good one!
-------------------- If takes all the future, we'll live through the past, If the phone doesn't ring, it's me.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[confused]](graemlins/confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
