_____________________________________________

To the Editor:

Stop the presses! According to Neil Genzlinger ("What Bites? Some Cheap Medical Advice", October 24), Lyme disease has become an "unhip, forgotten" illness.

So now we can focus on the reality of Lyme disease as a skyrocketing infection (40% increase yearly) that has only been adequately controlled by two strategies:

the Connecticut approach that abolished reporting of positive tests in the riskiest state, and the New York Times approach of not covering the disease other than with humorous fluff.

Sadly, these strategies have contributed to the trivialization of an illness that is anything but a joke to the millions of Lyme disease sufferers around the country.

Too bad that Mr. Genzlinger did not seek out the national Lyme Disease Association (www.lymediseaseassociation.org) or the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (www.ilads.org).

He would have received more accurate information about the severity of diseases transmitted by ticks, and he might have thought twice about writing his flip column.

Perhaps he would have written a humorous piece about congestive heart failure, which is as disabling as chronic Lyme disease. Then we could all have a good laugh.

I also responded but need to go back and see if I met the 150 word limit. I was a little wordy in my response.

I do believe it would help if more people responded with the goal of educating.

God Bless You,

_____________________________________________
Responses need to be sent to the NY Times, and also to

the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School regarding this article

(see contact information at conclusion)

Suggestions for Points to address in letters:

Cavalier View of Lyme disease as groovy disease, untrendy disease, "unhip, forgotten Lyme disease."

No one talks about Lyme disease anymore. [No one at NY Times will write realistically about LD]

"Lyme disease? Puh-leeze, don't be so 90's. Or was it 80's?" Figures skyrocketing each year, more articles in media than ever before - except the NY Times.

"Dr. Leonard H. Sigal, who has been studying Lyme disease for 23 years" - incorrect verb, correct "studying" to read "denying"

Dr. Sigal is listed in connection with Rheumatology and Connective Tissue Research at the Medical school site.

Many better persons for the columnist to have consulted, relating to Lyme disease.
"The disease is passed along by deer ticks, which of course hang out with deer," = = no mention of the two year cycle and the part

that the mouse actually plays
" and so Dr. Sigal has no problem identifying the culprit: developers." = mice, and deer ticks, can be everywhere, even in the city, and there are many cases of city dwellers with Lyme disease who have

never gone into the woods or lived at the edge or had anything to do with developers

""What they do is, they scallop properties out of the forest," he said. "What they're doing is putting the person right on top of the deer's habitat." Deer habitat is only

part of the story - what about the mice? And the robins, (CDC reference) and the other vectors?

"The quote-unquote `Lyme disease season' is defined by when the nymph is out there looking for a blood meal, and that's typically April-May until August-September," he said. "But at this time of year, when

there are no nymphs, the adults are perfectly capable of giving you Lyme disease." = WHAT Lyme disease "season??"
"Doggone it, I said, they're right; I've had Lyme disease all along. And so, I realized, has practically everyone else here in the

Unusual and Strange Behavior State." = cavalier treatment of Lyme disease. Substitute the word "cancer" or "diabetes," or any other disease which also has the potential to disable or be fatal - would it be appropriate to treat the subject in a humorous manner?

"Dr. Sigal, though, was unenthusiastic about diagnosis-via-lists-found-on-the-internet." = the list was from the NIH website!

"And they go to a somewhat less-than-
reputable-clinician, and Lyme disease becomes the explanation for all of their ailments and complaints. That way lies madness."

There is a disconnect here. The implication is that in diagnosing by internet list, no medical testing will be performed.

And who is more of a Less-than-reputable clinician, the physician who tests and treats, or the physician who is paid extremely large amounts by insurance companies to deny Lyme disease.

See http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/frankd/sigal2.htm

The last page of the four page document marked as exhibit four indicates that you had spent eight hours and 40 minutes at a rate of $560 an hour

"He said he didn't think I had Lyme disease but gave me some pink pills anyway. Then he charged me only $5." = didn't "THINK" - didn't test, gave patient pink pills.

Not aware Doxycycline came in pink. Author must have gone to a "less than reputable physician" if he was not tested and was given medication anyway, a medication other than the standard two capsules of Doxycline.

Other suggested themes to be addressed: New York Times was well aware both of the LDA Conference and the ILADS conference this past weekend (press releases faxed to

newsroom editors and several reporters), as well as other Lyme disease news in the past, and the reactions to misinformation concerning the Stalking Steere article and the Gina Kolata article.

Why print an article misleading the public that nothing seems to be going on anymore with Lyme disease or another misleading and false Lyme disease article?

The New York Times' historical bias against chronic Lyme disease and against reporting on the controversy.

The bad taste of mocking a disease that is chronic, debilitating, disabling, and sometimes fatal, and more.

The lack of knowledge of the reporter. The lack of knowledge of Dr. Sigal, who freely admits

Q. You're not trained in infectious diseases, are you?
A. No, I am not.

and

"A. I would not typify myself or describe myself as being a leading authority [in the field of Lyme disease diagnosis and treatment].

I would describe myself as having some knowledge about Lyme disease and some insights. I would be not so egotistical as to claim to be a leading authority."

see http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/frankd/sigal2.htm

19. Misleading the public that Lyme disease is something to be laughed about and to disregard the seriousness of it, not to even seek definitive testing.

20. Why does NY Times continue to choose to address the subject of Lyme disease on a less than factual basis?

----------------------------------------------------------
Contact information:
NY Times: see http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html

RWJ see http://rwjms.umdnj.edu/about/administration.htm and http://rwjms.umdnj.edu/about/overseers.htm and

Office of the Dean
New Brunswick
Clinical Academic Building, Suite 1400
125 Paterson Street
New Brunswick, NJ 08901
(732) 235-6300
Dean's Page
[email protected]

Here is a comment on his review of a book. http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art25362.asp
[quote]
Paula Laurita
BellaOnline's Library Sciences Editor
The Librarian - A Review of a Reviewer

In half a page Neil Genzlinger managed to insult an entire profession multiple times.
In a review of The Librarian, by Larry Beinhart, Neil Genzlinger chooses to stray from the book to critique the profession of librarianship. Genzlinger is a critic for the New York Times. His review appeared in the Sunday, October 17, 2004, edition of The New York Times Book Review. After reading the opening paragraph I had to walk away to calm down. What could get this librarian so upset? Exhibit one, the opening paragraph:
[quote]
Poor librarians. Soon, no doubt, to go the way of blacksmiths and town criers, their chosen field made obsolete by Internet search engines and self-perpetuating electronic databases. But first, one last hurrah, in Larry Beinhart's raucous new novel, "The Librarian," in which a Dewey decimal doofus holds in his hands nothing less than the fate of the free world.]

If you look him up on "google.com" you will find that his attitude in this article is in his usual nefarious,demeaning style.

If it is any comfort, he wrote a play which was called The Last Detail. Here is part of a review of said play/musical.
[quote from www.newyorkmetro.com/arts/fringe/04/lastdetail.htm]
Meanwhile, Neil Genzlinger's lurching libretto either builds to songs that never happen or is interrupted by tunes that don't need to be heard. [end quote]

I plan to include my opinion of his writing in my letter to the editor.

[quote]
In the New York Times, New Jersey edition of Sunday, Oct. 24th, an article by Neil Genzlinger called "What Bites? Some Cheap Medical Advice," Genzlinger says it all in his title.

When one has Lyme disease what really bites is the cheap, cynical attitude of many doctors like Dr. Sigal, (who has even written an article about what he calls "Pseudo Lyme Disease") and the other one who gave Genzlinger "pink pills."

That cynicism is matched by writers like Genzlinger, who call themselves "critics" and are so addicted to looking for clever, demeaning phrases, that they can't even write about a serious illness without their usual snide approach. Hey, I bet Neil would have a ball writing about Cerebal Palsy and such!

I would like to hear his critique of Lyme disease, if after he finishes his course of "pink pills," the disease has disseminated into his brain and he finds he can't recall all those clever cynical phrases.

It ain't funny, Neil!

thanks for heads up on Len Sigal. Where did you obtain it?

I quit reading Old York Times long ago. Neil G is as reputable as any Lymespeaker they can find (tongue firmly in cheek). I blushed at his "Rotton tomatoes" web site, which evoked a few snickers from folks behind me at the library.

What better place to find Lyme misinformation than from a rotton veg.

Has anyone seen any responses published in any NYTimes papers?

I just sent you an e-mail.

And yes, does anyone know what responses were published in the New York Times?

Haven't heard anything yet.

Looks like another case of freedom of the press being used absolutely irresponsibly.

My question is why are they doing this. It is an obvious disinformation campaign. Got to be coming from the top.