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 » General Support » Us, Them, and Scientific Method...a Rant

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Us, Them, and Scientific Method...a Rant
pdivi
Junior Member
Member # 7690

Icon 1 posted      Profile for pdivi     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have been perusing the Internet in search of information which will help me assess whether I've had a Lyme relapse, and the biggest finding I've had so far is the medical community is practically useless on this subject. I am forced to take notes from message boards, or choose between the advice of "good" scientists or the "bad" scientists. And I thought the whole foundation under scientific method was taking a hypothesis (not a "side") and proving or disproving it with observation (not "belief"). Where is the objectivity in this mess?

So now I get to choose between camps. One camp has its believe, its anecdotal evidence, and the other camp has the same. One requires you risk not getting well, the other requires you subject your liver to handfuls of antibiotics. But neither has hard, objective, quantitative, scientific proof that passes the sniff test. Why not? We're not dealing with some obscure disease here. We're dealing with a disease that is endemic in some of the most population-dense states in the country.

I read one post here from someone wanting to know what percentage of Lyme patients become chronic. One reply - few. Another reply - almost all. Shouldn't this be a number that's fairly easy to find? Does one even exist? Has anyone in the scientific community bothered to ask?

And here we are on a message boards, administering medical advice to each other, basically conducting human medicinal trials. And no one is even collecting the outcome of these trial in a central place so we can actually LEARN something from them. It's a joke.

So if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go take some garlic extract and hope I can keep this bug at bay long enough for the experts to sort out their differences.

Pardon the rant, but I've been searching the Internet for three days straight and I am more confused now than when I started.


Posts: 8 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greatcod
Unregistered


Icon 1 posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I shared your sense of what the scientific
method was. From what I can figure, medical science is plagued by having to control for the enormous complexity of numerous interacting variables. When it comes to Lyme, the problem is multiplied by spinning
the experimental designs to yield desired outcomes. The "no chronic Lyme" side has received most of the money and has published many more articles. Chronic infection is very rare according to them. Its sort of unargueable truth..and in their research, they seem to not even look for it. Its almost surreal, in part because the only serious consequence of Lyme is its chronicity.
I know this is probably not very helpful, but you asked a good question. You are not the only person confused by Lyme "science".

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kara Tyson
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 939

Icon 6 posted      Profile for Kara Tyson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Medicine is part science and part opinion. We will never know everything there is to know about the body or about every disease. What we know today may be disproved 20 years from now.

There are so many variables.

Take for instance the word 'chronic'. Chronic means differant things to a PHD than it does to an MD. It means differant things in one language vs. another language.

There is always a side. The idea that a hypothesis is unbiased is fiction. It doesnt exist outside of a book definition. It really is impossible in the real world. And it does not take into account MONEY, pride, prestige, or patents.

Take for instance a study to see if meat causes cancer. If the study is funded by PETA...I can tell you the result.

Another example has to do with statistics. Statistics can be manipulated and are used inappropriatly all the time.

An example: Let's say you have 100 people in a study.

The people in the study all have cancer. They are asked if they drink coffee. Let's say 70% raise their hands.

It would not be unusual for a headline to read "coffee causes cancer 70% of the time".

**
Much of the problem has to do with words meaning differant things to differant groups of professionals. MD's, PHD's and scientists use the same words but use them in very differant ways.



Posts: 6022 | From Mobile, AL | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lou
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 81

Icon 1 posted      Profile for lou     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you want documented lyme info, go to www.lymeinfo.net
Posts: 8430 | From Not available | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
janet thomas
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 7122

Icon 1 posted      Profile for janet thomas     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You'll need a lot of garlic cause you'll be waiting a good long while.

But, let's get back to you -Are you having a Lyme relapse? Why would you think that?

Any recent Lyme blood work to shed some light?

If you would share your lyme history perhaps we could help a bit.

Personally I have no dichotomy regarding chronic Lyme. Living with it is all the proof I need.

Oh, BTW, I doubt garlic will stop the wily Bb.


Posts: 2001 | From NJ | Registered: Mar 2005  |  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.