posted
Why is our 1$M Lyme institute saying long-term abx should not be given?
I will not mention the name of the doctor who runs it, as I understand moderator Lou B says it's against the rules here.
But I would like to know why Columbia's website has so many highly questionable and even downright HARMFUL pieces of advice.
For example this:
"Taken together, these study results suggest that repeated antibiotic therapy may be beneficial for a subgroup of patients. However all of these studies also reported troubling adverse effects associated with the IV antibiotic therapy.
Given these potentially dangerous risks, it is clear that other safer and more durable treatments are needed for patients with persistent symptoms. "
(boldface mine)
What safer and more durable way does Columbia know of to kill bacteria apart from antibiotics?
I know that they have advocated gabapentin.
Gabapentin acts on neurotransmitters, has a significant side effect profile, and does NOT kill any microbes.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
To me, it looks like they meant "other treatments are needed". They ARE needed, of course. Doesn't mean they exist at the moment.
Long term antibiotics DO have adverse effects and risks that aren't good. Sometimes the benefits outweigh the risks. But sometimes the unexpected consequences are worse than the disease itself. In other cases it's a draw. There's no way of predicting beforehand.
Posts: 115 | From US | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
WPinVA
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 33581
posted
That is disappointing. I read an article this morning describing HIV treatment - basically that a person with HIV needs to be on anti-virals for life or else the viral load builds and their CD4 count goes down.
And I thought.... why not the same type of treatment for Lyme?
Posts: 1737 | From Virginia | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged |
poppy
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5355
posted
Until those better treatments are available, there isn't any real choice between untreated disease and using antibiotics, is there?
Posts: 2888 | From USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Depends on the person, perhaps. Like I know people who turned around on IV rocephin after 10 months. My opinion would be to try to stop the infection even if a person needs to be on longterm antibiotics, because what's the alternative for them? A life of illness otherwise.
I also see that the Columbia site lists the IDSA site as a useful site, along with the ILADS site. Perhaps they're useful for other infectious diseases, but not in the least for ours. My preference would be that they not be listed there.
Posts: 13116 | From San Francisco | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi 8 legs bad--- so good to see you here. I hope you are doing fine and I wanted to thank you for all your work in publicizing the conspiracy behind this disease. A while back, I had given hard copies of your article Lyme is a Bioweapon to several doctors, including the head of ILADS. The country is now finally waking up to this nightmare of EIS and mainstream media deception regarding Lyme disease.
Chronic Lyme denialists have been proven to be completely wrong by science recently(as we knew they would), but that said, long term antibiotics also do not cure this permanent infection-- I know first hand.
I was on antibiotics for 2 years and did not get cured. Eva Sapi's research also showed that doxycycline actually INCREASES the number of borrelia round bodies-- while decreasing live spirochetes.
In essence, we feel better on antibiotics because live spirochetes are not actively pooping/prancing in our blood--- but the cysts/granules are still there in increased numbers, and they live to come another day once the antibiotics are stopped. Parasites also play a central and mostly unknown role.
This disease is so complex and devilish and probably is not curable at least with current drugs.
We desperately need more practical research on curative agents, as well as more basic research on how this organism survives--- in biofilm, in cyst forms, in blebs, etc etc etc... I just wish the Lyme community here would start some major Crowd Funding initiatives-- like Dr Alan MacDonald's.
The government, the CDC and the AMA are doing nothing for us, so we need to bite the bullet and just start funding research on promising herbs-- like Dr. Sapi's research.
Once we find a cure--- the denialists will eat their words.
A cure (or least better treatments)--- is the BEST revenge!!!
Posts: 696 | From New York | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
LisaK
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 41384
posted
this is nuts... I see this post right after I just googled in desperation to see if by some slim chance there is current info on a local dr that knows something about tick diseases.....
I found this page from the network here- on myths and facts:
"Myth: All ticks carry Lyme disease bacteria.
Fact: "Only deer ticks carry Lyme disease, and not all deer ticks have it," says health network family medicine physician John Peters, DO.
Myth: If you find a deer tick attached to your skin, you will get Lyme disease.
Fact: Not necessarily. "The tick has to be attached to your skin for at least 36 hours," Peters says. If a deer tick has been on your body for less than 24 hours, remove it and monitor your symptoms. If you're able, bring the tick to your doctor so it can be tested.
Myth: The bull's-eye rash is the only symptom you will have.
Fact: You also may have fatigue, fever, headache, achiness and joint pain. "If you feel like you have the flu, especially in the summer, you may have Lyme disease," Gareca says.
Myth: All tick bites should be treated preventatively with antibiotics.
Fact: You don't want to take antibiotics for an infection you may not have. However, if you have the bull's-eye rash, your doctor may start you on antibiotics before receiving a positive Lyme disease diagnosis.
Myth: Lyme disease is hard to diagnose.
Fact: Lyme disease is diagnosed with two blood tests. The ELISA test is performed first. If the result is positive or indeterminate, your doctor will perform the western blot test to confirm a positive diagnosis.
Myth: Lyme disease can be recurrent.
Fact: "There is no scientific evidence to support this," Gareca says.
Myth: A Lyme disease clinic provides the best care.
Fact: Your primary care doctor or an infectious diseases specialist can provide appropriate care.
Myth: You can't prevent Lyme disease.
Fact: You can. "Check yourself, your family and pets for ticks after being outside," Peters says. "Wear long pants tucked into socks, long-sleeved shirts and lightcolored clothing so you can see ticks on you." Spray tick repellant on your clothing before going outside.
I am so tired of it . I don't know how much longer I can take it and hold all this in. I really want to start throwing rotten eggs at some people.
someone please help me. I really cannot take it. sign me: "so mad I could spit (and then some)"
-------------------- Be thankful in all things- even difficult times and sickness and trials - because there is something GOOD to be seen Posts: 3558 | From Eastern USA | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, there is much to be discouraged about. But to those who haven't heard, there is some VERY good news: The ILADS guidelines have just been accepted by the National Guidelines Clearing House.
This is HUGE. ILADS guidelines are now the ONLY guidelines for Lyme diagnosis and treatment that are validated in accordance with IOM criteria.
This follows on the heels of Alan MacDonald's ground-breaking research showing Bb and Bm persistence in the brain as the cause of Alzheimers.
AND........British billionaire's announcement that his entire family has Lyme after years of misdiagnosis :
IDSA/CDC/ALDF cabal is folding like a house of cards. Wormser, Steere, Auerwater, et al have been seen retreating to their bunkers as the angry mobs descend.
-------------------- Sick since at least age 6, now 67. Decades of misdiagnosis. Numerous arthritic, neuro, psych, vision, cardiac symptoms. Been treating for 7 years, incl 8 mos on IV. Bart was missed so now treating that. Posts: 765 | From nw ct | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
"The National Guidelines Clearinghouse (NGC) is an initiative of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The NGC recently adopted the Institute of Medicine (IOM) standards for developing trustworthy guidelines, which define the highest level of excellence that a guideline can achieve. Guidelines posted on the NGC website must now satisfy these standards.
Thus, the inclusion of ILADS’s peer reviewed guidelines on the NGC website demonstrates that they meet the level of excellence called for by the IOM.
ILADS is the first organization to issue guidelines on Lyme disease that were developed in accordance with the IOM standards.
The document provides a detailed review of the pertinent medical literature and contains the first set recommendations for Lyme disease based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process.
This rigorous review format is also used by many other well-respected medical organizations including the World Health Organization (WHO), the American College of Physicians, and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK.
ILADS guidelines are the only Lyme disease guidelines that included a patient from the Lyme community as an author or as a member of the guidelines development panel. "
Good grief, I could not get past all the acronyms. Too much flipping bureaucracy. I think I see where the problem may lie.
...............................................
(breaking up the text for easier reading for many here)
[ 09-23-2015, 03:26 PM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posts: 478 | From Third Coast | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
LisaK
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 41384
posted
so, I see National Guidelines Clearing House is a government system? what relationship is this with the CDC?
this is a good thing, yes, but I am not educated on the reason why. will this deffinitely lead to some big changes? or will they now battle it out? sorry I am brain dead right now
-------------------- Be thankful in all things- even difficult times and sickness and trials - because there is something GOOD to be seen Posts: 3558 | From Eastern USA | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LisaK: so, I see National Guidelines Clearing House is a government system? what relationship is this with the CDC?
this is a good thing, yes, but I am not educated on the reason why. will this deffinitely lead to some big changes? or will they now battle it out? sorry I am brain dead right now
I just typed in "Lyme" on the website and the IDSA recommendations are listed 1st and ILADS 2nd.
Posts: 115 | From US | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
LisaK
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 41384
posted
is that how it was prior, A.G.????
interesting
-------------------- Be thankful in all things- even difficult times and sickness and trials - because there is something GOOD to be seen Posts: 3558 | From Eastern USA | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
All new or revised guidelines must now be done in accordance with IOM (Institute of Medicine) principles. IDSA is currently in the process of redoing their guidelines. If they do not follow the IOM principles, their guidelines could be rejected, leaving ILADS guidelines as the only accepted guidelines.
IDSA has already been caught "playing games" with this process. Example: The patient rep. on the panel was not even a Lyme patient. I believe they have changed this in response to letters from certain congressmen.
-------------------- Sick since at least age 6, now 67. Decades of misdiagnosis. Numerous arthritic, neuro, psych, vision, cardiac symptoms. Been treating for 7 years, incl 8 mos on IV. Bart was missed so now treating that. Posts: 765 | From nw ct | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree its great the ILADS guidelines are up there, but I'd like to return to the original topic of this thread - the shambles going on at our 1M$ Lyme institute in Columbia.
Robin, it is actually much worse than just the fact the Columbia website is advertising IDSA. They will NOT state that chronic Lyme needs to be treated with antimicrobials and they list BOTH the IDSA and the ILADS guidelines without stating a preference.
I'm pasting here an applling quote from Columbia's director, who I am not allowed to name here.
In the event that this thread is arbitrarily closed, I strongly urge everyone who is reading or participating in this thread to complain, as it is VITAL that we know what is going on and are allowed to have a free and democratic debate about it.
Columbia has departed from everything that ILADS has stood for for decades.
Here is the quote: (capital lettes and boldface are mine):
"The quote is from his paper in the Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences Volume 25 Issue 3, Summer 2013, pp. 176-186
Post-Treatment Lyme Syndrome and Central Sensitization
"The cause of persistent symptoms after treatment for Lyme disease remains a source of controversy. .... "Treatment trials, however, confirm that a sizeable subgroup of patients continue to experience post-treatment Lyme disease symptoms despite repeated antibiotic therapy.
" Lack of response to antibiotic therapy suggests that the underlying mechanism for persistent symptoms among a subgroup of patients is NO LONGER PERSISTENT INFECTION......"
"This work was supported in part by the Lyme & Tick-borne Diseases Research Center at Columbia University Medical Center, established by the Lyme Research Alliance, Inc. and the Lyme Disease Association, Inc."
When we have so much evidence proving that chronic Lyme IS due to chronic borrelia infection, and we know there are so many mechanisms Borrelia has to evade abx treatment, statements like this are an utter disgrace.
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
User "Wake up", I think there are a range of outcomes for people with chronic Lyme who take long-term abx.
You cannot generalise from the experience of just one person - yourself.
Some people get better after long-term abx; some are not completely cured but become able to function once more; some do not improve.
A good doctor does not give up, nor does he tell the patient that because his prescribed treatment didnt work, that means the patient has a mental health problem.
There are also a wide variety of different abx and treatment protocols in use, and some may be more effective than others.
It's difficult to do randomised controlled trials when there is no funding available for those who want to treat chronic Lyme as an infection, and all the funding in the world for those who wish to deny it.
I agree with you that any parasitic co-infections are extremely important to treat too.
It is true that Dr Sapi found doxycycline precipitating the transformation to cyst form - but experienced LLMDs are aware of this and try to incorporate cyst-busting abx or herbal medicines into their protocols too.
I disagree that the Denialists will "eat their words when we find a cure".
What's more likely is that they will do everything they can to SUPPRESS any information related to cure, and harass those doctors who prescribe it.
Borreliosis is a sensitive biowarfare issue and it's shocking to note that the US DoD and its allies appear to prefer to maintain a blanket of secrecy around it rather than cure its chronic victims, which may run into the tens of millions internationally when all is known.
What's even more inexplicable is why those we thought were on our side, like Columbia, are more and more adopting the language of the Denialists.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well it is ongoing infection. How can that even be debated when they are supposed to be helping us.
Eight legs, our govt has proven that it doesn't care about collateral damage during wars. WE just so happen to be the collateral damage now.
Posts: 115 | From US | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
lpkayak
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5230
posted
I have been watching this unfold for years. Wake up did a goid job of describing wht is going on. I watched alan macdonald describe it and show it with slides....and i talked to him about it in new haven many years a go...before he got so sick i thought he had died
I used to post about this iver and over again trying to explain but i finally got tired. If you havent followed the scirnce from the beginning this may be new andcyou may be mad about it...if if you have followed it...you get it.
Pulsing was based on fooling the ketes so they would come out of cysts and be killed
Its true more, better wsys to tret need to be found but i doubt more abx will be the answer.
Im curious to know whst the definition of long term abx is. 4 weeks?4 months?4 years? The discussion and research is worthless if the same definition. Is not used
One new thing to look at to see why lyme seems to be chronic is the work of the most famous mold doc. Scott wrote an artical about him in better health guy.
1. The reason some with lyme tx get better and some go chronic can have to do with genes 2. Even when you kill all ketes the toxins thst remain can keep you sick 3 . 1/4 population has gene problem tht keeps them sick(detox) 4. If you also have mold exposure or mcs its much harder to get better
In the last 3 years the science about this has changed and it wont help to keep saying the answer is different than what the science says
Its all published. Just read it.
-------------------- Lyme? Its complicated. Educate yourself. Posts: 13712 | From new england | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
In the last 3 years the science about this has changed and it wont help to keep saying the answer is different than what the science says
I am sure that having a systemic fungal infection or a genetically weak immune system would make Lyme worse, just as it would worsen any chronic disease. I don't think we have a disagreement there.
But that doesn't negate the science which states that Borrelia has incredible abilities to persist.
That science hasn't changed - on the contrary, what Alan MacDonald has been finding just in the last few weeks is phenomenal, in terms of proving conclusively, with DNA probes, that Borrelia can remain active in the brain as a chronic persistent infection - and cause Alzheimer's disease.
My problem is with Columbia suggesting that a lack of response to abx means the infection is gone, in the face of all this evidence that Borrelia CAN and DOES persist.
That stance is no different to the IDSA stance.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
sparkle7
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10397
posted
You have to look into where they get their funding. I did a quick search & couldn't find any information about who donates money. I don't have time to continue looking.
It's an Ivy League school - what do you expect? Not to be snippy - I know you are trying - but they aren't going to be coming up with anything that will rock the boat anytime soon.
If you want to find treatment options "outside of the box" - you have to look elsewhere. There are doctors who offer long-term abx treatment.
I, personally, wouldn't want to go that route, though. I wouldn't deny it to others but I don't think it's the way to go - for me.
If you are expecting healthcare policy changing decisions - it's not going to come from Columbia. We just got Obamacare in the US. Look at what's going on with drug prices...
You think they want people to be taking expensive drugs on a long term basis?
Posts: 7772 | From Northeast, again... | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sparkle, you are right about Ivy League, and that the more tightly linked a place is with the Establishment, the less likely we are to get help.
But there is a special problem here in addition. The moderator Lou won't permit me to mention his name, but the doctor who runs the specialist Lyme institute at Columbia is someone that many people in the lyme community believe is helping us.
He did write some good papers many many years ago. But since taking on his role as director of the Lyme institute he has been veering more and more towards the Denialist point of view.
And the irony is, the answer to your question about "who funds them" in this case is ....us!!! His institute is the beneficiary of extremely large sums of money courtesy of LDA and other Lyme campaigns.
That is the scandalous thing that I'm trying to highlight here.
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
sparkle7
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10397
posted
Look into what a Hegelian Dialectic is... We have to do as much research as possible & make our own decisions. It's unfortunate but we can't depend on any of those people or groups to help us 100%.
As to who gets contributions - I don't know what to say. It's complicated... Each of us has to make a decision as to the direction to go for treatment. It's a really individual decision.
I've always been a proponent of naturopathic medicine. Long term antibiotics are the antithesis of natural methods of healing. I wouldn't tell anyone not to take antibiotics if they helped, though.
So - it's a conundrum... Maybe they are both right & wrong...? It depends on the individual case.
Posts: 7772 | From Northeast, again... | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
$1 million in terms of medical research for such a complex, serious disease is sadly a drop in the bucket.
Eventually, the denialists will fall on their sword of lies. The truth always comes out eventually.
Posts: 115 | From US | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
lpkayak
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5230
posted
People feel better on abx because when abx are present the ketes go to cyst and sx are less. They continue to reproduce in the cyst however so when abx are taken away the unfection comes back hard. Abx can give you some time to feel a little better until you stop the abx. They are not killing or stopping reproduction
They kill some...the ones caught off guard ... they come out of cyst when abx are stopped and a bunch are killed when abx begin again...but more go to cyst and reproduce
The ones that die leave toxins. A large part of population can get rid of toxins but a small part cant without help. These people will be sick until a way is found to get rid of toxins
We all need a better way to kill the bugs....that hasnt been found yet...unless you have good genes andvget appropriate tx soon.after bite
This is old news. The columbia study holds up in some ways...but they use the term long term abx but the time is nothing like the 2-5 yrs those of us dealing with this for years are used to. Its apples and oranges. The real llmds know this. There are reasons why columbia is doing what it us doing.
Theres a lot of b s going on...we still need a way to kill keets and there is one doc who has new info about it but he is pretty much being ignored byblyme community
-------------------- Lyme? Its complicated. Educate yourself. Posts: 13712 | From new england | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
TNT
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 42349
posted
quote:Originally posted by lpkayak: Theres a lot of b s going on...we still need a way to kill keets and there is one doc who has new info about it but he is pretty much being ignored byblyme community
You got me on that one lpkayak. I racked my brain and can't say I know what/who you are referring to.
Could you share? PM me if you'd rather not share on the forum.
Thanks.
Posts: 1308 | From Eastern USA | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The columbia study holds up in some ways..."
Which Columbia study were you referring to?
" There are reasons why columbia is doing what it us doing."
Can you explain a bit more what you mean when you say that? thanks.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
TerryK
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 8552
posted
The problem is they are using discredited studies to back up their opinion on antibiotic treatment. One of the studies they use would require that lyme patients perform better than the general population in order to be considered a significant improvement. They could at the very least give both sides.
quote:Originally posted by Eight Legs Bad: I agree its great the ILADS guidelines are up there, but I'd like to return to the original topic of this thread - the shambles going on at our 1M$ Lyme institute in Columbia.
Robin, it is actually much worse than just the fact the Columbia website is advertising IDSA. They will NOT state that chronic Lyme needs to be treated with antimicrobials and they list BOTH the IDSA and the ILADS guidelines without stating a preference.
I'm pasting here an applling quote from Columbia's director, who I am not allowed to name here.
In the event that this thread is arbitrarily closed, I strongly urge everyone who is reading or participating in this thread to complain, as it is VITAL that we know what is going on and are allowed to have a free and democratic debate about it.
Columbia has departed from everything that ILADS has stood for for decades.
Here is the quote: (capital lettes and boldface are mine):
"The quote is from his paper in the Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences Volume 25 Issue 3, Summer 2013, pp. 176-186
Post-Treatment Lyme Syndrome and Central Sensitization
"The cause of persistent symptoms after treatment for Lyme disease remains a source of controversy. .... "Treatment trials, however, confirm that a sizeable subgroup of patients continue to experience post-treatment Lyme disease symptoms despite repeated antibiotic therapy.
" Lack of response to antibiotic therapy suggests that the underlying mechanism for persistent symptoms among a subgroup of patients is NO LONGER PERSISTENT INFECTION......"
"This work was supported in part by the Lyme & Tick-borne Diseases Research Center at Columbia University Medical Center, established by the Lyme Research Alliance, Inc. and the Lyme Disease Association, Inc."
When we have so much evidence proving that chronic Lyme IS due to chronic borrelia infection, and we know there are so many mechanisms Borrelia has to evade abx treatment, statements like this are an utter disgrace.
Follow the money, Elena!!
Most likely "our" little $1 million dollar institute has been co-opted by much bigger money!!! Money like "Partnership for New York City, Bloomberg/Jerome Hauer" type of money. This kind of money is the $600,000 cash in a hotel room brief case kind of "shut up" money given to key committee members or professors so that they "change their opinion or vote" kind of money.
In the face of BIG money and probable threats to tenure or grants or anything like that--- Columbia is now back tracking-- plain and simple and nothing to get upset about.
We in the Lyme community need to stop giving out money to establishment organizations that can easily be compromised or co-opted.
Don't you remember the sleezy tactics and big money/ Law firms-- used to put Karen Forschner's Lyme Disease Foundation out of business?
Its simple. Money makes people lie and it can corrupt science.
The elite have unlimited money at their disposal, and they will continue to LIE about chronic lyme and they will continue to co-opt committees, universities, and institutes--- even when there are thousands of videos showing live spirochetes in blood, and hundreds of pathologists who find spirochetes in those who are chronically infected!!!
The elite know that if they 'own" the so called experts, they control the debate. It also suits them to break the debate into two violently opposed sides.
Who knows--- they have probably already tried to co-opt ILADS. We need to be aware that this could happen at any time, given enough $600,000 cash filled suitcases.
We already know that the government has extensively researched spirochetes on live subjects at Tuskeegee and in Guatemala-- and covered it up for a very long time.
All of the above is the reason why we need dispersed CROWDFUNDING for LYME CURE RESEARCH.
We need hundreds-- no thousands-- of grad students around the world--- working on testing thousands of anti biofilm, anti cyst and anti spirochete compounds in the lab in vitro!!
Once we have a cure--- this "denialst" versus "nondenialist" debate won't really matter any more. Its all just a hegelian dialect designed to distract anyway.
Yes, antibiotics are very iimportant--- but we need to move beyond antibiotics because they do not have a great track record at eliminating biofilm, cysts, blebs or intracellular organisms-- all of which are a part of Chronic Lyme.
Posts: 696 | From New York | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wake Up, I agree with much of what you're saying, but I also have to disagree with some things.
First, it's not **just** about money. Borrelia is a militarily sensitive bioweapons issue. I have been researching that topic for the past 12 years and there is no doubt in my mind that this is the driving factor behind our misery.
For those of you who are interested in understanding these issues, I have published articles on this topic which are on my website. (For ex. www.elenacook.org/bwsept06.html )
Crowd-funding researchers is an excellent idea, and in fact there is currently a major crowdfunding campaign at the moment for Dr Alan MacDonald's Alzheimer's research, which is all non-profit.
You are correct that we must distrust all Establishment organisations, not only because they are open to corruption from powerful corporations with a stake in the Denial, but - more directly - because those who preside over them will do what the US military instructs them, be it via the CDC's Epidemic Intelligence Service, or otherwise.
This extends to the public health establishment in Britain and other countries politically influenced by the US.
I agree with you that other therapies need to be researched apart from antibiotics, and there are many promising facts emerging regarding various herbal and other alternative approaches.
But the problem is, if researchers are to be able to research herbal or any other treatments for Lyme **effectively and scientifically**, they need access to accurate information about Borrelia.
But anyone who tries to publish such accurate information is blocked at best, or at worst - persecuted.
A further problem arises when children are concerned. An adult can choose to try various alternative treatments that are available, and no one will stop him or her.
If a child falls seriously ill with Lyme, what then? Any parent whose child receives a Lyme diagnosis outside of current Denialist criteria, and who tries to obtain treatment for that child - whether alternative or conventional - is at risk of having their child taken away by Social Services, with hellish consequences.
These are just two of the reasons why we DO need to battle the Denialists, and not just rely on crowdfunding anti-biofilm herbs.
Patient-funded research is a great idea, and herbal treatments may well provide a definitve cure one day. But the Denialist vs pro-patient fight is real and needs to be fought alongside these other approaches.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
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,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic