"This settlement allows suppressed scientific viewpoints and evidence
to be heard, and it is promising news for patients," said Lorraine
Johnson, executive director of the California Lyme Disease
Association.

Okay, if you say so, I guess....but why? Exactly?

This smacks more of a face-saving POLITICAL "settlement", rather than
a LEGAL one.

Face...this thing ended with a flat thud...a whimper...no "bang".

Looks like its only requirement is that some sort of "independent"
panel be assembled to review the IDSA Guidelines...

...for the sole purpose of determining whether or not the Guidelines
should be revised.

In other words, a committee will look things over and decide if there
is any reason to edit...NOT taht there will be wholesale revision.

There is absolutely NO mention of ANY legal misconduct whatever...let
alone somethng that would give rise to "antitrust" issues.

No litigation...no charges...no complaint. Nothing.

Unsubstantiated allegations of "undisclosed conflicts". Unfortunately,
you have no way of judging how possibly relevant these might have
been...as they are undisclosed.

And...WHY does Blumenthal somehow think that it is somehow illegal for
private professional organizations to exclude views they don't wish to
accept?

I admit to being entirely baffled on this one...

Well, I guess I will accept the "victory" declaration...(standing on
the deck of the carrier, "mission accomplished")...if it includes the
going home part, too.

Face it, it 3rdshmuk,

WE WON.

Blumenthal's conclusion was that the original process was crooked and
filled with conflicts of interest...

On May 2, 2:37 pm, ThoughtCriminal <PrinceBernha...@gmail.com> wrote:



Face it, it 3rdshmuk,

WE WON.

We did, huh?

HOW?

This has got to be the biggest pile of nothing I've ever seen. Don't
be naive (and stupid).



Blumenthal's conclusion was that the original process was crooked and
filled with conflicts of interest...

LOOK...READ the actual AGREEMENT between the parties. Do you see where
there are NO admissions on the part of EITHER party?

THAT is what matters.

NOT the face-saving "spin" anyone wants to try to put on it.

All it requires is that a "neutral' panel be assembled to review the
Guidelines with an eye toward a possible further revision.

It does NOT mandate revision.

YOU and your embarrassing "part-line" rants are NOT helping. Attacking
everyone who disagrees with you and branding them as "bioweaponeers"
is troubling.

That's a whole lot of "bioweaponeers", out there...

You are completely right 3rd, is actually a loss, the possibility of
uncovering if some members did indeed engaged in misconduct is now
gone.

which is just going to vindicate the IDSA and further "clear up" the
controversy.

tried right? Blumenthal for president.-

On May 2, 2:37�pm, ThoughtCriminal <PrinceBernha...@gmail.com> wrote:



Face it, it 3rdshmuk,

WE WON.

We did, huh?

HOW?

This has got to be the biggest pile of nothing I've ever seen. Don't
be naive (and stupid).



Blumenthal's conclusion was that the original process was crooked and
filled with conflicts of interest...

LOOK...READ the actual AGREEMENT between the parties. Do you see where
there are NO admissions on the part of EITHER party?

THAT is what matters.

NOT the face-saving "spin" anyone wants to try to put on it.

All it requires is that a "neutral' panel be assembled to review the
Guidelines with an eye toward a possible further revision.

It does NOT mandate revision.

YOU and your embarrassing "part-line" rants are NOT helping. Attacking
everyone who disagrees with you and branding them as "bioweaponeers"
is troubling.

That's a whole lot of "bioweaponeers", out there...

Now that I think of it your right- .  They won't change anything- the
whole med system is a bunch of crooks.

they still stick with their same old guidelines probably saying we did
the best we could but we are only trying to protect the patients
against harm from antibiotics overdose.

family you bet they wouldn't follow those guidelines.

 I don't understand why Blumenfal doesn't actually reveal the Drs.
names and show the actual evidence of their connections with the ins.
cos.   Probably no lawyer would help him.

malpractice certain hospitals are untouchable. I think they pay off
the local in town lawyers a sum every yr. like an issurance policy not
to touch them.....one in particular is Lehigh Valley Hospital....CDC,
FDA, Dept of H& Human Svces all crooks......

lawyers - a few decent ones. But did you ever hear that expression
"Your as crooked as a Phil. lawyer".    

hospital doctors who make terrible errors that old expression "They
bury their mistakes."-

On May 2, 10:29�pm, lipanz <lipanzmari...@aol.com> wrote:



Now that I think of it your right- . �They won't change anything- the
whole med system is a bunch of crooks.

Sorry to hear that you have such a dim view of your fellow man.

I suppose that some bitterness and frustration is understandable,
given what Lyme patients are customarily put through, and the
attitudes that a lot of physicians express...

...but, come on...the "WHOLE med system is a bunch of crooks"?
Everyone is "corrupt" except you?

Like I said...some bitterness is understandable...but this...it gets
excessively tiresome after a very short while. And, please...just
because there is endless repetition of this garbage on the internet
(and by some very disturbed people, too)...doesn't make it true.

Perhaps you might wish to consider the POSSIBILITY that there
might...just might...be HONEST differences of opinion over complicated
issues of medical science.

Just me...but I really would suggest that you have something like
evidence before slinging accusations.

�We'll review it---yea, and

they still stick with their same old guidelines probably saying we did
the best we could but we are only trying to protect the patients
against harm from antibiotics overdose.

Probably.

But if was one of their own

family you bet they wouldn't follow those guidelines.

Well...they are GUIDELINES...and the IDSA GUIDELINES state on their
face that they are NOT to be used as a substitute for sound clinical
judgement.

This is, apparently, an indication of a deficit in reading
comprehension skills among some in the Lyme "advocacy" community.

�I don't understand why Blumenfal doesn't actually reveal the Drs.
names and show the actual evidence of their connections with the ins.
cos. � Probably no lawyer would help him.

Huh? He IS a L-A-W-Y-E-R. His office is full of L-A-W-Y-E-R-S.

Actually, it's a fairly good question...why don't you ask him?�

Understand, however, that there are varying degrees of "conflict" and
conflict analysis. Perceived, potential, actual. What Blumenthal,
himself, stated, was that he needed to show that opposing views had
been suppressed because of economic benefit to those who attempted to
suppress the views.

Apparently, he was unable to show this. Otherwise, he should have
filed an action. He did not.

Regardless of what his (somewhat irresponsible) press release says,
the actual AGREEMENT between the parties does NOT admit that any such
conflicts were present.

Just like in med.

malpractice certain hospitals are untouchable. I think they pay off
the local in town lawyers a sum every yr. like an issurance policy not
to touch them.....one in particular is Lehigh Valley Hospital....CDC,
FDA, Dept of H& Human Svces all crooks......

.And then the Philadelphia

lawyers - a few decent ones. But did you ever hear that expression
"Your as crooked as a Phil. lawyer". � �

No. But I don't think much of things like that...you seem content to
tar a lot of people with a pretty broad brushstroke.

From Chicago, myself. But you may have heard some less than flattering
things about how we do things, here, also.

And in ref to certain

hospital doctors who make terrible errors that old expression "They
bury their mistakes."-

Yes, well, fine...everyone is crooked and corrupt. Yeah, we get
it...they're out to get you....

LOOK...this is kind of "in-yo-face" politics is what the problem is,
here. Has been from the very beginning, �when some genius decided that
the "act-up" model was the thing to emulate.

The so-called "leadership" here (LDA) decided that a little payback
was in order, (I am guessing, Ms. Smith as much as said so, once, if I
recall) �for the "harrassment" of so-called "LLMD"s. And so, they used
their political connections to have an elected official search private
records under the pretense of an "antitrust" investigation.

And this, in turn, was caused, in my opinion, because the LDA has
beome too intertwined with these so-called "LLMD"s �and has allowed
itself to become an advocate for them, primarily, and NOT patients.

This is a fundamental mistake, in my opinion.

If the Connecticut AG came into YOUR house and commenced a search
because of what you say here...you would scream and howl bloody
murder.

But the real problem...the real ultimate mistake...was the assessment
of what is really going on here.

This was never going anywhere because there was nothing there to start
with.

Little in this world is accomplished through aggressive confrontation.
And if the LDA thought that they could force their way into the
room...force their way into the discussion...they are clueless fools.

Think about it...there is, now, I guess, pending Federal legislation
that involves some reincarnation of this "tick advisory panel"...or
whatever...and so, you have the seeming intention of the LDA to
sitdown with the people they just sic'ed the Connecticut AG on and
make happy-happy, nice talk, I guess.

It's absolutely absurd...and the patients are being FAILED...by BOTH
sides of this....MESS.

Time for the so-called "leadership" to either get a grip or shut up
and step down.

Probably time for more e-mails...

Perhaps you might wish to consider the POSSIBILITY that there
might...just might...be HONEST differences of opinion over complicated
issues of medical science.

I agree with some of the things you say to me.   Yes I am full of
anger which I should leg go of some.  But if you only knew the
unbelievable real unbelievable "Horror situtation" that  was done to a
loved one in my family. This has nothing to do with my reply but in
general but if the lyme was treated properly (no use explaining on
that) but if  the secondary complications from the Lyme etc.didn't
develop  this whole horror story would never have happened.  No more
on that Please....

I thought or else I wasnt reading properly that you did say that we
really didn't win anything in ref to the Infectious Disease Society
and Blumenthal's exposure.   Perhaps I erred and got it mixed up with
someone else's post.

 Sorry. As I always seemed to agree with most of your posts.  This is
3rd man I'm replying to???

What about several yrs. ago  when McSweegan was smearing the lyme D.
Fdtn of Conn. and blackening them and saying they out the money and it
found in one of his internet smears that crazy lyme fdtn.  He really
tried to knock them out. The Lyme D. Fdtn sued for slander and false
statements.

 Now did they win.  No.

 I'm sure in Chicago you must have heard the expression "You can't
fight city hall."

You will have to admit in this world there will always be the battle
of good and evil.  

QUOTE ----  Is this from 3rd man.Something doesn't sound right.

Perhaps you might wish to consider the POSSIBILITY that there
might...just might...be HONEST differences of opinion over complicated
issues of medical science.- Hide quoted text -