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 Amazon.com for each purchase originating from this site.

When purchasing from Amazon.com, 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 » Activism » !!! Blumenthal's Press Release re: IDSA Settlement!

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: !!! Blumenthal's Press Release re: IDSA Settlement!
Dancer
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 11039

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dancer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Connecticut Attorney General's Office
Press Release

Attorney General's Investigation Reveals Flawed Lyme Disease Guideline Process, IDSA Agrees To Reassess Guidelines, Install Independent Arbiter
May 1, 2008

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal today announced that his antitrust investigation has uncovered serious flaws in the Infectious Diseases Society of America's (IDSA) process for writing its 2006 Lyme disease guidelines and the IDSA has agreed to reassess them with the assistance of an outside arbiter.

The IDSA guidelines have sweeping and significant impacts on Lyme disease medical care. They are commonly applied by insurance companies in restricting coverage for long-term antibiotic treatment or other medical care and also strongly influence physician treatment decisions.

Insurance companies have denied coverage for long-term antibiotic treatment relying on these guidelines as justification. The guidelines are also widely cited for conclusions that chronic Lyme disease is nonexistent.

"This agreement vindicates my investigation -- finding undisclosed financial interests and forcing a reassessment of IDSA guidelines," Blumenthal said. "My office uncovered undisclosed financial interests held by several of the most powerful IDSA panelists. The IDSA's guideline panel improperly ignored or minimized consideration of alternative medical opinion and evidence regarding chronic Lyme disease, potentially raising serious questions about whether the recommendations reflected all relevant science.

"The IDSA's Lyme guideline process lacked important procedural safeguards requiring complete reevaluation of the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines -- in effect a comprehensive reassessment through a new panel. The new panel will accept and analyze all evidence, including divergent opinion. An independent neutral ombudsman -- expert in medical ethics and conflicts of interest, selected by both the IDSA and my office -- will assess the new panel for conflicts of interests and ensure its integrity."
Blumenthal's findings include the following:

* The IDSA failed to conduct a conflicts of interest review for any of the panelists prior to their appointment to the 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel;

* Subsequent disclosures demonstrate that several of the 2006 Lyme disease panelists had conflicts of interest;

* The IDSA failed to follow its own procedures for appointing the 2006 panel chairman and members, enabling the chairman, who held a bias regarding the existence of chronic Lyme, to handpick a likeminded panel without scrutiny by or formal approval of the IDSA's oversight committee;

* The IDSA's 2000 and 2006 Lyme disease panels refused to accept or meaningfully consider information regarding the existence of chronic Lyme disease, once removing a panelist from the 2000 panel who dissented from the group's position on chronic Lyme disease to achieve "consensus";

* The IDSA blocked appointment of scientists and physicians with divergent views on chronic Lyme who sought to serve on the 2006 guidelines panel by informing them that the panel was fully staffed, even though it was later expanded;

* The IDSA portrayed another medical association's Lyme disease guidelines as corroborating its own when it knew that the two panels shared several authors, including the chairmen of both groups, and were working on guidelines at the same time. In allowing its panelists to serve on both groups at the same time, IDSA violated its own conflicts of interest policy.
IDSA has reached an agreement with Blumenthal's office calling for creation of a review panel to thoroughly scrutinize the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines and update or revise them if necessary. The panel -- comprised of individuals without conflicts of interest -- will comprehensively review medical and scientific evidence and hold a scientific hearing to provide a forum for additional evidence. It will then determine whether each recommendation in the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines is justified by the evidence or needs revision or updating.

Blumenthal added, "The IDSA's 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel undercut its credibility by allowing individuals with financial interests -- in drug companies, Lyme disease diagnostic tests, patents and consulting arrangements with insurance companies -- to exclude divergent medical evidence and opinion. In today's healthcare system, clinical practice guidelines have tremendous influence on the marketing of medical services and products, insurance reimbursements and treatment decisions. As a result, medical societies that publish such guidelines have a legal and moral duty to use exacting safeguards and scientific standards.

"Our investigation was always about the IDSA's guidelines process -- not the science. IDSA should be recognized for its cooperation and agreement to address the serious concerns raised by my office. Our agreement with IDSA ensures that a new, conflicts-free panel will collect and review all pertinent information, reassess each recommendation and make necessary changes.

"This Action Plan -- incorporating a conflicts screen by an independent neutral expert and a public hearing to receive additional evidence -- can serve as a model for all medical organizations and societies that publish medical guidelines. This review should strengthen the public's confidence in such critical standards."

THE GUIDELINE REVIEW PROCESS

Under its agreement with the Attorney General's Office, the IDSA will create a review panel of eight to 12 members, none of whom served on the 2006 IDSA guideline panel. The IDSA must conduct an open application process and consider all applicants.
The agreement calls for the ombudsman selected by Blumenthal's office and the IDSA to ensure that the review panel and its chairperson are free of conflicts of interest.
Blumenthal and IDSA agreed to appoint Dr. Howard A. Brody as the ombudsman. Dr. Brody is a recognized expert and author on medical ethics and conflicts of interest and the director of the Institute for Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Brody authored the book, "Hooked: Ethics, the Medical Profession and the Pharmaceutical Industry."
To assure that the review panel obtains divergent information, the panel will conduct an open scientific hearing at which it will hear scientific and medical presentations from interested parties. The agreement requires the hearing to be broadcast live to the public on the Internet via the IDSA's website. The Attorney General's Office, Dr. Brody and the review panel will together finalize the list of presenters at the hearing.

Once it has collected information from its review and open hearing, the panel will assess the information and determine whether the data and evidence supports each of the recommendations in the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines.
The panel will then vote on each recommendation in the IDSA's 2006 Lyme disease guidelines on whether it is supported by the scientific evidence. At least 75 percent of panel members must vote to sustain each recommendation or it will be revised.
Once the panel has acted on each recommendation, it will have three options: make no changes, modify the guidelines in part or replace them entirely.

The panel's final report will be published on the IDSA's website.

ADDITIONAL FINDINGS OF BLUMENTHAL'S INVESTIGATION

IDSA convened panels in 2000 and 2006 to research and publish guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease. Blumenthal's office found that the IDSA disregarded a 2000 panel member who argued that chronic and persistent Lyme disease exists. The 2000 panel pressured the panelist to conform to the group consensus and removed him as an author when he refused.

IDSA sought to portray a second set of Lyme disease guidelines issued by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) as independently corroborating its findings. In fact, IDSA knew that the two panels shared key members, including the respective panel chairmen and were working on both sets of guidelines a the same time -- a violation of IDSA's conflicts of interest policy.
The resulting IDSA and AAN guidelines not only reached the same conclusions regarding the non-existence of chronic Lyme disease, their reasoning at times used strikingly similar language. Both entities, for example, dubbed symptoms persisting after treatment "Post-Lyme Syndrome" and defined it the same way.

When IDSA learned of the improper links between its panel and the AAN's panel, instead of enforcing its conflict of interest policy, it aggressively sought the AAN's endorsement to "strengthen" its guidelines' impact. The AAN panel -- particularly members who also served on the IDSA panel -- worked equally hard to win AAN's backing of IDSA's conclusions.

The two entities sought to portray each other's guidelines as separate and independent when the facts call into question that contention.

The IDSA subsequently cited AAN's supposed independent corroboration of its findings as part of its attempts to defeat federal legislation to create a Lyme disease advisory committee and state legislation supporting antibiotic therapy for chronic Lyme disease.

In a step that the British Medical Journal deemed "unusual," the IDSA included in its Lyme guidelines a statement calling them "voluntary" with "the ultimate determination of their application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances." In fact, United Healthcare, Health Net, Blue Cross of California, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and other insurers have used the guidelines as justification to deny reimbursement for long-term antibiotic treatment.

Blumenthal thanked members his office who worked on the investigation -- Assistant Attorney General Thomas Ryan, former Assistant Attorney General Steven Rutstein and Paralegal Lorraine Measer under the direction of Assistant Attorney General Michael Cole, Chief of the Attorney General's Antitrust Department.

View the entire IDSA agreement - (PDF-2,532KB)


Content Last Modified on 5/1/2008 1:51:01 PM

Posts: 227 | From South of the North Pole | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mtree
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 14305

Icon 1 posted      Profile for mtree     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
thank you for posting this.
[Smile] mtree

--------------------
worrying about tomorrow takes its strength away from today

Posts: 970 | From Point PLeasant , NJ | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bettyg
Unregistered


Icon 14 posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
breaking this up for neuro lymies like me/others.
dancer, could you post a note at the top of yours saying my broken up version is below yours? thanks! saves our eyes/migraines!! Betty [group hug]


quote:
Originally posted by Dancer:


[QB] Connecticut Attorney General's Office
Press Release


Attorney General's Investigation Reveals Flawed Lyme Disease Guideline Process, IDSA Agrees To Reassess Guidelines, Install Independent Arbiter
May 1, 2008


Attorney General Richard Blumenthal today announced that his antitrust investigation has uncovered serious flaws in the Infectious Diseases Society of America's (IDSA) process for writing its 2006 Lyme disease guidelines and the IDSA has agreed to reassess them with the assistance of an outside arbiter.


The IDSA guidelines have sweeping and significant impacts on Lyme disease medical care.


They are commonly applied by insurance companies in restricting coverage for long-term antibiotic treatment or other medical care and also strongly influence physician treatment decisions.


Insurance companies have denied coverage for long-term antibiotic treatment relying on these guidelines as justification.


The guidelines are also widely cited for conclusions that chronic Lyme disease is nonexistent.
***********


"This agreement vindicates my investigation -- finding undisclosed financial interests and forcing a reassessment of IDSA guidelines," Blumenthal said.


"My office uncovered undisclosed financial interests held by several of the most powerful IDSA panelists.


The IDSA's guideline panel improperly ignored or minimized consideration of alternative medical opinion and evidence regarding chronic Lyme disease, potentially raising serious questions about whether the recommendations reflected all relevant science.


"The IDSA's Lyme guideline process lacked important procedural safeguards requiring complete reevaluation of the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines -- in effect a comprehensive reassessment through a new panel.


The new panel will accept and analyze all evidence, including divergent opinion.


An independent neutral ombudsman -- expert in medical ethics and conflicts of interest, selected by both the IDSA and my office -- will assess the new panel for conflicts of interests and ensure its integrity."


Blumenthal's findings include the following:


* The IDSA failed to conduct a conflicts of interest review for any of the panelists prior to their appointment to the 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel;


* Subsequent disclosures demonstrate that several of the 2006 Lyme disease panelists had conflicts of interest;
**********************


* The IDSA failed to follow its own procedures for appointing the 2006 panel chairman and members, enabling the chairman, who held a bias regarding the existence of chronic Lyme, to handpick a likeminded panel without scrutiny by or formal approval of the IDSA's oversight committee;


* The IDSA's 2000 and 2006 Lyme disease panels refused to accept or meaningfully consider information regarding the existence of chronic Lyme disease, once removing a panelist from the 2000 panel who dissented from the group's position on chronic Lyme disease to achieve "consensus";


* The IDSA blocked appointment of scientists and physicians with divergent views on chronic Lyme who sought to serve on the 2006 guidelines panel by informing them that the panel was fully staffed, even though it was later expanded;


* The IDSA portrayed another medical association's Lyme disease guidelines as corroborating its own when it knew that the two panels shared several authors, including the chairmen of both groups, and were working on guidelines at the same time.


In allowing its panelists to serve on both groups at the same time, IDSA violated its own conflicts of interest policy.


IDSA has reached an agreement with Blumenthal's office calling for creation of a review panel to thoroughly scrutinize the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines and update or revise them if necessary.


The panel -- comprised of individuals without conflicts of interest -- will comprehensively review medical and scientific evidence and hold a scientific hearing to provide a forum for additional evidence.


It will then determine whether each recommendation in the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines is justified by the evidence or needs revision or updating.



Blumenthal added, "The IDSA's 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel undercut its credibility by allowing individuals with financial interests -- in drug companies, Lyme disease diagnostic tests, patents and consulting arrangements with insurance companies -- to exclude divergent medical evidence and opinion.


In today's healthcare system, clinical practice guidelines have tremendous influence on the marketing of medical services and products, insurance reimbursements and treatment decisions.


As a result, medical societies that publish such guidelines have a legal and moral duty to use exacting safeguards and scientific standards.


"Our investigation was always about the IDSA's guidelines process -- not the science.


IDSA should be recognized for its cooperation and agreement to address the serious concerns raised by my office.


Our agreement with IDSA ensures that a new, conflicts-free panel will collect and review all pertinent information, reassess each recommendation and make necessary changes.


"This Action Plan -- incorporating a conflicts screen by an independent neutral expert and a public hearing to receive additional evidence -- can serve as a model for all medical organizations and societies that publish medical guidelines.


This review should strengthen the public's confidence in such critical standards."


THE GUIDELINE REVIEW PROCESS
*****************************


Under its agreement with the Attorney General's Office, the IDSA will create a review panel of eight to 12 members, none of whom served on the 2006 IDSA guideline panel.


The IDSA must conduct an open application process and consider all applicants.



The agreement calls for the ombudsman selected by Blumenthal's office and the IDSA to ensure that the review panel and its chairperson are free of conflicts of interest.


Blumenthal and IDSA agreed to appoint Dr. Howard A. Brody as the ombudsman.
***************************


Dr. Brody is a recognized expert and author on medical ethics and conflicts of interest and the director of the Institute for Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch.


Brody authored the book, "Hooked: Ethics, the Medical Profession and the Pharmaceutical Industry."


To assure that the review panel obtains divergent information, the panel will conduct an open scientific hearing at which it will hear scientific and medical presentations from interested parties.


The agreement requires the hearing to be broadcast live to the public on the Internet via the IDSA's website.


The Attorney General's Office, Dr. Brody and the review panel will together finalize the list of presenters at the hearing.


Once it has collected information from its review and open hearing, the panel will assess the information and determine whether the data and evidence supports each of the recommendations in the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines.


The panel will then vote on each recommendation in the IDSA's 2006 Lyme disease guidelines on whether it is supported by the scientific evidence.


At least 75 percent of panel members must vote to sustain each recommendation or it will be revised.


Once the panel has acted on each recommendation, it will have three options:
------------------------------

make no changes,
modify the guidelines in part
or replace them entirely.


The panel's final report will be published on the IDSA's website.


ADDITIONAL FINDINGS OF BLUMENTHAL'S INVESTIGATION
***********************************************


IDSA convened panels in 2000 and 2006 to research and publish guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease.


Blumenthal's office found that the IDSA disregarded a 2000 panel member who argued that chronic and persistent Lyme disease exists.


The 2000 panel pressured the panelist to conform to the group consensus and removed him as an author when he refused.


IDSA sought to portray a second set of Lyme disease guidelines issued by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) as independently corroborating its findings.


In fact, IDSA knew that the two panels shared key members, including the respective panel chairmen and were working on both sets of guidelines a the same time -- a violation of IDSA's conflicts of interest policy.


The resulting IDSA and AAN guidelines not only reached the same conclusions regarding the non-existence of chronic Lyme disease, their reasoning at times used strikingly similar language.


Both entities, for example, dubbed symptoms persisting after treatment "Post-Lyme Syndrome" and defined it the same way.


When IDSA learned of the improper links between its panel and the AAN's panel, instead of enforcing its conflict of interest policy, it aggressively sought the AAN's endorsement to "strengthen" its guidelines' impact.


The AAN panel -- particularly members who also served on the IDSA panel -- worked equally hard to win AAN's backing of IDSA's conclusions.


The two entities sought to portray each other's guidelines as separate and independent when the facts call into question that contention.


The IDSA subsequently cited AAN's supposed independent corroboration of its findings as part of its attempts to defeat federal legislation to create a Lyme disease advisory committee and state legislation supporting antibiotic therapy for chronic Lyme disease.


In a step that the British Medical Journal deemed "unusual," the IDSA included in its Lyme guidelines a statement calling them "voluntary" with "the ultimate determination of their application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances."


In fact, United Healthcare, Health Net, Blue Cross of California, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and other insurers have used the guidelines as justification to deny reimbursement for long-term antibiotic treatment.



Blumenthal thanked members his office who worked on the investigation --
**********************************


Assistant Attorney General Thomas Ryan,

former Assistant Attorney General Steven Rutstein

and Paralegal Lorraine Measer under the direction of Assistant Attorney General Michael Cole, Chief of the Attorney General's Antitrust Department.


View the entire IDSA agreement - (PDF-2,532KB)
*********************************************


Content Last Modified on 5/1/2008 1:51:01 PM

OUTSTANDING REPORT! wow; i really enjoyed reading and breaking this up!! [bonk] [bow] [group hug] [kiss]
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Keebler
Honored Contributor (25K+ posts)
Member # 12673

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

and here's the original link to include if you pass this along:

http://www.ct.gov/ag/cwp/view.asp?a=2795&q=414284

Connecticut Attorney General's Office
Press Release
Attorney General's Investigation Reveals Flawed Lyme Disease Guideline Process, IDSA Agrees To Reassess Guidelines, Install Independent Arbiter
May 1, 2008

-

Posts: 48021 | From Tree House | Registered: Jul 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
docjen
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 7510

Icon 1 posted      Profile for docjen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have sent copies of this press release to my Congresspersons, along with a note stating that IDSA has been actively trying to keep this bill from moving forward. Given the recent announcement and findings of the unethical activity of the IDSA, now the proper ethical action would be to move the bill forward to hearings at the earliest convenience.

Just as a reminder....we have momentum on our side right now! Can't heard to put it back on their desk tops!

Posts: 393 | From Washington, DC | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A_Caro
Member
Member # 15191

Icon 1 posted      Profile for A_Caro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That is GREAT news for the Lyme community!

Huge!

CaroA

Posts: 12 | From WISC | Registered: Apr 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MaryL
Member
Member # 11997

Icon 1 posted      Profile for MaryL     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are we getting this press release out to the commissions responsible for hearing the Lyme bill? This seems a huge factor to discredit their attempts at influencing whether the bill is heard!

Have we got this to the Oprah show since she showed some interest in Lyme? Who else can we get this to so that it is front and center in the media?

Posts: 81 | From Iowa | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
IMHisda
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 6998

Icon 1 posted      Profile for IMHisda     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Doesn't this open the IDSA up to a huge class action

lawsuit? I was bit in 1990 and still suffering so

I think I could be a part but too exhausted to

pursue it alone. I would think there would be a

statute of limitations on this.

Maybe it's not strong enough to sue?

--------------------
RV

Posts: 249 | From Healing in USA | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lymen
Member
Member # 6882

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lymen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have been thinking about suing too.

But I think that we need the guidelines to be actually changed in the new version.
IDSA is going to manipulate the panel (that is what they are saying) and outcome may be still not so good.

Then Class action against Wormser et al would be a great idea. Lets take their money away.
We could also sue the president of IDSA and IDSA.

Posts: 98 | From BC | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
IMHisda
LymeNet Contributor
Member # 6998

Icon 9 posted      Profile for IMHisda     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We almost need to sue just to recoup our costs from this dastardly disease. I spent about 6K on HBOT alone- craziness.

--------------------
RV

Posts: 249 | From Healing in USA | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tickled1
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 14257

Icon 1 posted      Profile for tickled1     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm on board for a class action lawsuit. Anyone know how to make that happen?
Posts: 2541 | From Northeast | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pocono Lyme
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5939

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pocono Lyme     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks Keebler for providing the direct link to Attorney General Blumenthal.

Due to an article in my local paper written by IDSA, very biased of course, I copied the info. from your link and sent it to everyone in my address book.

I titled it, see the real truth. Well, something like that.
Thanks.

--------------------
2 Corinthians 12:9-11


9 But he said to me, �My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.� Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ�s power may rest on me.

Posts: 1445 | From Poconos, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

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.