This is an article written obviously by people who have too much time on their hands and NOT a lot in the brain department.
You'd THINK ducks would spend time WORKING on the HORRIBLE Lyme situation in our country... rather than playing.... and spending money doing so... on the Internet! At OUR sites!
Definitely a McStupid Junior situation here... definitely! But this time it is dip and dap.. Cooper and Feder reporting. Shapario must have been absent the day they played this game?
See the chart in the article here on page 3 and see how BAD our LymeNet rated as an accurate place to get info on Lyme disease and how well duck hotels like Hopkins rated.
Dec 2004--This is old news, although that doesn't make it any less
infuriating.
Posted by AliG (Member # 9734) on :
quote: Objective: Patients and families searching the Internet about Lyme disease may find conflicting information. Our purpose was to review the accuracy of information on Lyme disease easily available on the Internet.
If you change "accuracy" to "IDSA Butt-kissing adequacy", there may be actually BE some "accuracy" to this article. (don't change that last one or this will make no sense )
Posted by Robin123 (Member # 9197) on :
Nope. They didn't like us, ILADS, IgeneX or lymesite. I checked on lymesite for some more of that good inaccuate info, and they don't seem to exist anymore...
Posted by merrygirl (Member # 12041) on :
What a huge waste of time. Don't they have anything to do??
Maybe we should do the same thing...
IDiots
Posted by artur737 (Member # 11151) on :
It was later balanced by:
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005 Jun;24(6):577-8; author reply 578-9. Inaccurate information about lyme disease on the internet. Stricker RB, Johnson L, Harris N, Burrascano JJ.
Posted by cbb (Member # 788) on :
When you look at the ratings for each site that gives LD info, it becomes quite clear to me.
I think the biggest error is in the key below the chart on page 3. The "I" should be changed to "INFORMATIVE".
Posted by Michelle M (Member # 7200) on :
Considering some of the retarded stuff in that article, I'm honored that we are considered 'inaccurate.'
(For example, they adhere to the dead horse notion that for a lyme diagnosis, you need a positive ELISA followed by positive western blot -- this idiocy even though even Johns Hopkins admits the ELISA will be negative in up to 75% of people with late-stage lyme.)
Bunch of dim-wits.
Honestly, I'm almost embarrassed for them.
It's getting to where even the average citizen walking around without lyme knows these doctors are a joke.
Pfft.
Michelle
Posted by Michelle M (Member # 7200) on :
To balance out the utter and complete disgrace of that Feder article, here is a much BETTER and more accurate article concerning 'internet' patients.
Contrary to these so-called 'findings' of Feder and his goons, these authors actually find internet patients to be extremely educated and up on the latest treatments and developments. He finds that any 'misinformation' such as Feder complains of is either nonexistent or if offered is pretty quickly corrected.
That was a very nice article to read, Michelle. Thanks for sharing it. Posted by artur737 (Member # 11151) on :
Amazon sells niche type books (such as on Lyme Disease) on line that are unavailable in bookstores.
They give incentives for site owners to promote Amazon but both side benefits.
Similar offers were received by many special interests websites.
Posted by David95928 (Member # 3521) on :
Michelle, thanks for posting this.
Posted by Lymeblue (Member # 6897) on :
What about the last paragraph:
``It is not unusual for patients and families to visit a physician with preconceived notions concerning the diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease. These notions may be based on misinformation from the Web. The challenge for medical providers is to convince worried patients and families that some of the internet recommended testing and treatment of Lyme disease is inappropriate .This convincing can take multiple visits, debates, compromise and time.''
Posted by adamm (Member # 11910) on :
as in...
" Hiya. I come to cure ya 'Lymes!' "
Posted by Geneal (Member # 10375) on :
When I saw the article was published in the Pediatric ID Journal I thought...
A-ha! Theres that link again.....and again....and again.
I'd like someone who has Lyme to rate the information available on the internet.
Now wouldn't that be a nice change.
Ask someone who actually has been diagnosed with Lyme
Where they think their best info has come from....
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[cussing]](graemlins/cussing.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[shake]](graemlins/shake.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)