Lyme review panel members stir concern
01/29/09 18:39 Filed in: Lyme Disease in the news
At last, the IDSA (Infectious Diseases Society of America) has selected members to review the guidelines for the treatment of Lyme disease. Lyme awareness groups are alarmed at the placement of Carol J. Baker, MD, as the committee chairperson. Notably, there are also no ILADS (International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society) members on the review panel.
Lynn Shepler, MDJD, shares her concerns:
CAROL J. BAKER, MD, head of the new committee formed as a result of AG Richard Blumenthal's investigation, is Past-President of IDSA, and lists her chief interests as "VACCINOLOGY," "CLINICAL TRIALS," AND "VACCINE POLICY." She has published "more than 100 articles on vaccine research."
Dr. Baker is also a member of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Was Dr. Baker a member of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices of the CDC at any point when past or future Lyme disease vaccines have been discussed --- formally, or informally?
The team she is part of at "The Center of Vaccine Awareness and Research" in Houston, Texas describes itself as "dedicated to improving the health of children from infancy through adulthood by promoting vaccinations and educating families and health care providers on all available vaccines."
Uh, does this include the Lyme vaccine(s)? Dr. Wormser's principal conflict of interest was that he was consulting to pharmaceutical companies on Lyme disease vaccines --- something he knew about and refused to disclose to IDSA administrators.
Dr. Wormser was head of each of the two IDSA guidelines on Lyme disease that have been issued. In my personal opinion, both versions of the IDSA guidelines have been biased in favor of vaccine commercialization.
By my reasoning, the need to deny the existence of persistent infection is part of the drive to commercialize Lyme disease vaccines that are not otherwise ready for market. Persistent infection is an important scientific problem that needs to be solved before any vaccine trials can be done. Instead, Wormser et al simply lie, and maintain the patients are sick with "something else."
So, instead of Dr. Wormser, we have a prominent vaccinologist, and former President of IDSA as the head of the committee? On the face of it, I find this very alarming!
(Please post this information to any Lyme disease discussion board to educate patients about the possible biases on the part of members of this new committee).
Following is a list of Lyme review panel members:
Carol J. Baker, MD,
Chair Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, TX
William A. Charini, MD
Peabody, MA
Paul H. Duray, MD (retired)
Westwood, MA
Paul M. Lantos, MD
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC
Gerald Medoff, MD
Washington University School of Medicine
St. Louis, MO
Manuel H. Moro, DVM, MPH, PhD
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD
David M. Mushatt, MD, MPH & TM
Tulane University School of Medicine
New Orleans, LA
Jeffrey Parsonnet, MD
Dartmouth‐Hitchcock Medical Center
Lebanon, NH
Cmdr. John W. Sanders, MD
U.S. Naval Medical Research Center Detachment, Peru
Lynn Shepler, MDJD, shares her concerns:
CAROL J. BAKER, MD, head of the new committee formed as a result of AG Richard Blumenthal's investigation, is Past-President of IDSA, and lists her chief interests as "VACCINOLOGY," "CLINICAL TRIALS," AND "VACCINE POLICY." She has published "more than 100 articles on vaccine research."
Dr. Baker is also a member of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Was Dr. Baker a member of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices of the CDC at any point when past or future Lyme disease vaccines have been discussed --- formally, or informally?
The team she is part of at "The Center of Vaccine Awareness and Research" in Houston, Texas describes itself as "dedicated to improving the health of children from infancy through adulthood by promoting vaccinations and educating families and health care providers on all available vaccines."
Uh, does this include the Lyme vaccine(s)? Dr. Wormser's principal conflict of interest was that he was consulting to pharmaceutical companies on Lyme disease vaccines --- something he knew about and refused to disclose to IDSA administrators.
Dr. Wormser was head of each of the two IDSA guidelines on Lyme disease that have been issued. In my personal opinion, both versions of the IDSA guidelines have been biased in favor of vaccine commercialization.
By my reasoning, the need to deny the existence of persistent infection is part of the drive to commercialize Lyme disease vaccines that are not otherwise ready for market. Persistent infection is an important scientific problem that needs to be solved before any vaccine trials can be done. Instead, Wormser et al simply lie, and maintain the patients are sick with "something else."
So, instead of Dr. Wormser, we have a prominent vaccinologist, and former President of IDSA as the head of the committee? On the face of it, I find this very alarming!
(Please post this information to any Lyme disease discussion board to educate patients about the possible biases on the part of members of this new committee).
Following is a list of Lyme review panel members:
Carol J. Baker, MD,
Chair Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, TX
William A. Charini, MD
Peabody, MA
Paul H. Duray, MD (retired)
Westwood, MA
Paul M. Lantos, MD
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC
Gerald Medoff, MD
Washington University School of Medicine
St. Louis, MO
Manuel H. Moro, DVM, MPH, PhD
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD
David M. Mushatt, MD, MPH & TM
Tulane University School of Medicine
New Orleans, LA
Jeffrey Parsonnet, MD
Dartmouth‐Hitchcock Medical Center
Lebanon, NH
Cmdr. John W. Sanders, MD
U.S. Naval Medical Research Center Detachment, Peru
|
Lyme story airs!
07/04/08 13:30 Filed in: Lyme Disease in the news
According to Brooke Landau, Lyme activist and TV news reporter, television stations listen and respond when they are deluged with requests from viewers to air stories about a specific topic. Viewers are their bread and butter. Please take the time to comment on the ABC website to let them know you appreciate the story they aired this morning about the documentary film, Under Our Skin. Here's my comment to them:
Thank you, thank you for bringing this growing epidemic to light. However, as many have already noted, the majority of people suffering with Lyme disease never saw a tick bite, and never had the bull's eye rash. In addition, the tests for Lyme have what one physician refers to as "coin toss sensitivity," meaning that if you toss a coin, you get results that are just about as accurate as using the ELISA or the Western Blot for testing positive. According to ILADs physicians I have interviewed for the Lyme Disease Research Database, the CDC has a long history of ignoring scientific evidence for the existence of chronic Lyme disease. Thanks to CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, the IDSA is now being forced to review its Lyme disease treatment guidelines. People who are suffering with Lyme due to misdiagnosis, under-diagnosis, and simple ignorance have long been forced to become their own health advocates, often at a time in their lives when they are extremely sick. I applaud you for airing this segment on the Lyme controversy, yet I am disappointed to see that your reporters did not bother to investigate the accuracy of the numbers of new cases of Lyme reported each year. As someone else commented, that 20,000 quote is hideously underestimated. Next time, I hope you have the courage to quote numbers that are closer to the actual truth.
In the Lyme documentary Under Our Skin, filmmaker Andy Abrahams Wilson (Open Eye Pictures) exposes the cruel dismissal that the medical establishment frequently gives people who are sick and suffering with Lyme. The film opened in April at the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC. Andy is featured in the LDRD's interview series.
Thank you, thank you for bringing this growing epidemic to light. However, as many have already noted, the majority of people suffering with Lyme disease never saw a tick bite, and never had the bull's eye rash. In addition, the tests for Lyme have what one physician refers to as "coin toss sensitivity," meaning that if you toss a coin, you get results that are just about as accurate as using the ELISA or the Western Blot for testing positive. According to ILADs physicians I have interviewed for the Lyme Disease Research Database, the CDC has a long history of ignoring scientific evidence for the existence of chronic Lyme disease. Thanks to CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, the IDSA is now being forced to review its Lyme disease treatment guidelines. People who are suffering with Lyme due to misdiagnosis, under-diagnosis, and simple ignorance have long been forced to become their own health advocates, often at a time in their lives when they are extremely sick. I applaud you for airing this segment on the Lyme controversy, yet I am disappointed to see that your reporters did not bother to investigate the accuracy of the numbers of new cases of Lyme reported each year. As someone else commented, that 20,000 quote is hideously underestimated. Next time, I hope you have the courage to quote numbers that are closer to the actual truth.
In the Lyme documentary Under Our Skin, filmmaker Andy Abrahams Wilson (Open Eye Pictures) exposes the cruel dismissal that the medical establishment frequently gives people who are sick and suffering with Lyme. The film opened in April at the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC. Andy is featured in the LDRD's interview series.