posted
I am not a doctor, but I am a scientist, a published one at that, and I know how to read scientific studies. I know how to interpret the results, and I know the difference between an article and a study. I know the difference between fact and opinion.
Halperin, Wormser and all these crooked criminals may be able to convince the laymen with their "spin" on things, but they cannot fool me. I want to expose them, as a scientist, stating that they twist the facts from the studies to suit themselves. What they say is opinion, and has no factual basis.
Anything in a newspaper usually is not fact, but someone's opinion. When a researcher makes conclusions based on a study, and then another scientist picks and chooses certain parts of that study and twists it into a pretzel, that is criminal, unethical, and totally unprofessional. They are really discrediting themselves by doing this.
If I had any doubts about the lyme controversy before, they are completely squashed now because of the behavior of these unethical doctors that I am witnessing.
Unfortunately, it seems like the masses don't see what they are doing, and only a scientist or someone familiar with research studies can understand what they are doing.
We need to get this message out to the general public what they are doing.
Any suggestions?
Posts: 615 | From maryland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
bettyg
Unregistered
posted
roro,
good topic thread; i throw this right back at you.
coming from the scientist END OF THINGS of know the rights/wrongs on doing things, please give us some guidelines that YOU HAVE used regularly in your line of work.
then we can put together both parts to have a SOLID FOUNDATION of evidence!
i know you are not the only scientist that signed up stating you were a legitimate scientist! but i couldn't begin to tell you the names of the others
of what you read in the NJ articles, please write YOUR REBUTTAL to what you read based upon YOUR LYME AND SCIENTIFIC MIND KNOWLEDGE!
thank you for getting involved and using YOUR knowledge to help us as each of us contributes in our own little ways! go get them tiger!
IP: Logged |
I could never be as eloquent and formal as he, but if more doctors write papers such as he did maybe these pepers can be used to bury the IDSA.
I really feel that the IDSA is the root of all this controversy. everyone else, other doctors, are just blindly following them, and either ignorant or bullied into doing what they say.
Posts: 615 | From maryland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's just a matter of time before they (i call them Lyme Crooks, a/k/a Steere, Barbour, Fikrig, etc.)are going to hang themselves with their own data!
Lyme Disease should be called RELAPSING FEVER, because that is what it really is.
Did you know that:
Yale owns "Lyme Disease" and Alan Barbour owns "Southern Lyme Disease" and no one is allowed to have either disease.
US Patent #5,618,533- the patent for the only scientifically valid way to detect "Lyme borreliosis"
US Patent #5,932,220 = The patent for "Southern Lyme Disease."
Go look up all the patents Barbour and Steere own for Lyme, it's amaZing....i just can't believe that they have gotten away with this cryme against humanity for so long.
if any of you go to cave's post shown by ro above, i took 1 hr. and BROKE IT UP MORE for shorter paragraphs for us neuro lymies to be able to read it. bg
IP: Logged |
-------------------- My biofilm film: www.whyamistillsick.com 2004 Mycoplasma Pneumonia 2006 Positive after 2 years of hell 2006-08 Marshall Protocol. Killed many bug species 2009 - Beating candida, doing better Lahey Clinic in Mass: what a racquet! Posts: 830 | From Mass. | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, yes, I am a scientist too, and a published one as well.
One of the better papers out there is called something like "Perspectives of a Scientist / Patient" - you can find it on medline.
I think more papers like this need to be written. Write! Write letters, write a paper about it and submit it to journals, or write to your local newspaper stating your qualifications and then eloquently point out the IDSA's crazy inconsistencies.
Or perhaps a group of us should co-author a paper or two and try to get 'em published.
Also, the editors of these big, fancy, weighty journals are just people. Find out who the editor is of whatever journal you think is important and write to them pointing out what you think is scientific misconduct. Include your personal story.
If enough people do this, they won't be able to write us all off as hysterics (will they?).
Posts: 194 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not a scientist, and maybe I am not well read enough; but, can anyone tell me how IDSA catagorizes untreated Lyme infected persons.
If the CDC says 200,000 Lyme cases per year are undiagnosed (10 X's the number diagnosed); can we not assume this 200,000 are also UNTREATED?
If we assume (I know, there goes the science) a similar number per year are being infected but not treated, would that not mean that over a 20 years span 3 million U.S. citizens have been infected without treatment?
Someone please tell me HOW IDSA catagorizes this 1% of the U.S. population.
Posts: 70 | From AZ | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Barksplinter -- I've been learning about these numbers lately so figured I'd share the following.
CDC says the number of REPORTABLE cases is probably 10x higher than those actually REPORTED.
Reportable means the case meets CDC surveillance criteria (has EM rash or has CDC's required # of western blot bands.)
Doctors often don't report cases that they do diagnose. Possible reasons - there is alot of office time/paperwork involved, and also they may not want to draw attention to themselves from state medical boards.
CDC isn't talking about undiagnosed cases. They don't even go near that one.
So there are 3 levels of unknowns:
1. how many cases are diagnosed that meet CDC criteria but aren't being reported. that's the 10x estimate given by CDC.
2. how many cases are diagnosed that don't meet the CDC criteria and so are not reportable and not reported.
3. how many people are walking around (or lying in bed) who have no clue that they have lyme disease.
Per CDC, total reported cases 1990 to 2006 is 265,486.
Estimate of reportable cases over that time, multiply by 10, would be 2,654,860.
Any guesses as to how many total cases there REALLY ARE?
MOST of the people I know with Lyme disease (alot) did not meet CDC criteria.
Scary.
Posts: 227 | From South of the North Pole | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Dancer. I do know about the very Narrow guidelines the CDC uses... but my issue is: even using CDC numbers(!), one, two, or three million undiagnosed/untreated MUST be addressed somehow even if it is to say there is nothing they can do. If they are not Chronic Lyme what are they? Especially if they are symptomatic.
Another category to consider in Lyme Diagnosis numbers is mine. My WB has 11 of 14 positive IgM bands (I'm even positive in New York!), but I told my provider I did NOT want Lyme on my chart. My wife the same.
Posts: 70 | From AZ | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another published scientist here (albeit a social scientist, I know good vs. bad data when I see them.)
What is truly dumbfounding is that the IDSA folks contradict their OWN DATA consistently, with no explanations whatsoever.
There are a lot of very smart and savvy scientists in both the patient and doctor Lyme communities -- the problems is that the power lines and the monetary interests have, at least so far, trumped the voice of true, empirical science. Many of our LLMDs are extremely eloquent and well versed in the literature, as are many of our spokespeople.
-------------------- "Looks like freedom but it feels like death.. It's something in between, I guess"
Leonard Cohen, from the song "Closing Time" Posts: 822 | From California | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I would imagine what the IDSA would say about untreated people is that Lyme is usually a "self-limiting" disease. That means, if not treated, it "usually", but not always, gets better on its own.
And that might be true, for the most part. But there are clearly some who get it so bad they wind up in the hospital, and then there are some (like me), who end up with a stable, ongoing infection. This is the point where their "logic" gets funny. Because they used to acknowledge a minority remains infected, but now they say "post lyme syndrome" - go figure.
Posts: 194 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
daise
Unregistered
posted
Wahoo!
Two scientists.
Makes me wish I were a scientist.
Yes, write, write, write.
What medical journal has the highest standards of medical science? Alerting other scientists could have an impact--it's pressure.
It's saying "Aha. We know what you're doing and it's not "good practice" and it is ... fraud? Is that the word?
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!
![[group hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[kiss]](graemlins/kissing.gif)
![[cussing]](graemlins/cussing.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic