LymeNet Home LymeNet Home Page LymeNet Flash Discussion LymeNet Support Group Database LymeNet Literature Library LymeNet Legal Resources LymeNet Medical & Scientific Abstract Database LymeNet Newsletter Home Page LymeNet Recommended Books LymeNet Tick Pictures Search The LymeNet Site LymeNet Links LymeNet Frequently Asked Questions About The Lyme Disease Network LymeNet Menu

LymeNet on Facebook

LymeNet on Twitter

The Lyme Disease Network receives a commission from for each purchase originating from this site.

When purchasing from, please
click here first.

Thank you.

LymeNet Flash Discussion
Dedicated to the Bachmann Family

LymeNet needs your help:
LymeNet 2020 fund drive

The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations.

LymeNet Flash Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» LymeNet Flash » Questions and Discussion » Medical Questions » Lyme Disease Scandal

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Lyme Disease Scandal
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829

Icon 7 posted      Profile for Tincup         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Star Democrat
Easton, Maryland
Thursday, May 22, 2008


Lyme disease scandal

Published: Thursday, May 22, 2008 7:05 AM CDT

Thank you for continuing to care about those who have been affected by Lyme and tick-borne diseases.

The recent article by Steve Nery, "Society to review Lyme disease guidelines," followed by the editorial, "Lyme disease bills need passage now," have both been praised by countless health care providers, as well as those who continue to suffer Lyme disease's long-term chronic effects.

As many know, volunteer advocates and health care professionals have been battling the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), health departments and Johns Hopkins for continuing to promote unreliable diagnostic and treatment protocols, among other things.

The Attorney General's office recently concluded the IDSA Lyme guidelines were "seriously flawed," biased and in need of review by an independent medical panel.

They found the majority of individuals involved in the IDSA guideline development process held commercial interests related to vaccines, patents, and/or Lyme disease tests.

Unfortunately, the IDSA and their powerful but dwindling number of supporters continue to promote these dreaded guidelines and oppose legislative bills designed to address the exploding epidemic, making these individuals, in my opinion, more dangerous to our health than the ticks.

[Big Grin]


Posts: 20332 | From The Moon | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10375

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Geneal     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Scandal is a strange word when it comes to human life.

Maybe the Lyme Travesty.

Thanks for posting this.

Nice to continue to see the IDSA targeted for their "conflicts of interest".



Posts: 6250 | From Louisiana | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Member # 743

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lymetoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Posts: 94837 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Melanie Reber
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 3707

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Melanie Reber   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey Sugar-Plum,

Just so you know...your email is bouncing. [Smile]

Posts: 7006 | From Colorado | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Corinne E
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 4670

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Corinne E     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 

Just wondering if anyone can answer a question for me. Made me think of this after reading this post. Who owns the medical/testing labs in each province/city in Canada? Are they owned by the government or are they contracted by the government?

Anybody in Canada know these answers? At the moment, I cannot post anything to Canlyme, need to talk to Jim Wilson about that.


Posts: 461 | From Abbotsford, BC, Canada | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 7939

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Anneke     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't get how the IDSA can justify their opposition to this bill?? Does anyone know their argument? I'm really curious about the spin on this...
Posts: 364 | From California | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 1436

Icon 1 posted      Profile for shazdancer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hi Anneke,

The letter the IDSA wrote to Senator Kennedy against the passage of S1708 can be found HERE. Their opposition to the bill centers around the inclusion of people with non-IDSA points of view on the committee.
Unfortunately, we have serious concerns about the proposed composition of the federal advisory committee the bill would establish as it likely will promote non-scientifically-based advice about Lyme disease to federal decision-makers.
The heart of their problem is with chronic Lyme disease, since they don't believe in persistence.
A fundamental problem with S.1708, as drafted, is the bill's repeated references, overt and implied, to a condition that has been described inaccurately as ``chronic Lyme disease''....

The premise for prolonged antibiotic therapy for Lyme disease is the notion that some spirochetes can persist despite conventional treatment courses, thereby giving rise to the vague symptoms ascribed to chronic Lyme disease. Not only is this assertion microbiologically implausible, there are no convincing published scientific data that support the existence of chronic Lyme disease.

The letter came out on March 21. Almost 3 weeks earlier, the UC-Davis study, proving persistence of Bb in mice after "adequate" treatment, was published online ahead of print. The corresponding author of that study is listed as a consultant on the 2006 IDSA guidelines, so you can be pretty sure they knew about this study well aheead of publication.

Here's that part that cracks me up...
As a substitute to the establishment of a new federal advisory committee that is slanted toward individuals with an unorthodox and potentially dangerous viewpoint, IDSA proposes requesting the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies to conduct a review of Lyme disease diagnosis, treatment and prevention methods, particularly addressing diagnostic standards, the adequacy of current treatment guidelines, treatment options for post-Lyme disease disorder, effectiveness of current prevention methods, and the controversies associated with chronic Lyme disease.
They are going to get their review, but what is going to be reviewed is the ethics behind their own guidelines. Be careful what you wish for....

Hope that helps,

Posts: 1558 | From the Berkshires | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator

Quick Reply

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code is enabled.

Instant Graemlins

Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | LymeNet home page | Privacy Statement

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3

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 send your donations to:

The Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey
907 Pebble Creek Court, Pennington, NJ 08534 USA

| Flash Discussion | Support Groups | On-Line Library
Legal Resources | Medical Abstracts | Newsletter | Books
Pictures | Site Search | Links | Help/Questions
About LymeNet | Contact Us

© 1993-2020 The Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
Use of the LymeNet Site is subject to Terms and Conditions.