ADVOCATE: BigInsurance/ALDF throws a hissy fit over CT Lyme bill.
Mort Zuckerman
scientifi...@ostp.gov, pkru...@princeton.edu,
Stanle...@fiu.edu, emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com,
bob.d...@latimes.com
Subject: ADVOCATE: BigInsurance/ALDF throws a hissy fit over CT Lyme
bill.
Date: Jun 14, 2009 12:03 PM
ARTICLE BELOW
=========================================
The insurance companies were referring us to psychiatrists, knowing
psychiatrists don't know the first thing about medicine or
scientifically valid rule outs. Whence, upon being diagnosed as
"crazy," by the psyhchiatric hoes - who *KNOW* they're being hoes - we
were denied all our long term disability insurance. Then we ended up
on the dot guv welfare/Medicare/Medicaid dole, meaning, BigInsurance
committed a "fraud on the government" by being involved in the ALDF's
"guidelines:"
http://www.actionlyme.org/JUNE_13_2005_LETTER_TO_SPITZER.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/CONNOLLY_FISH_WEINSTEIN.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/UCONN_NO_HOSPITAL.htm
The New York Medical Board was supplied with their "experts" directly
from Kaiser-Permanente at New York Medical College (Peter Welch):
http://www.actionlyme.org/OPMC_CORRUPTION.htm
^^^ THAT is the actual crime committed by BigInsurance. *THEY* -
BigInsurance - Kaiser-Permanente both 1) infiltrated NYMC and 2) they
know psychiatry is quackery but the innocent victims of Yale's crimes
don't.
http://www.actionlyme.org/IDSA_III_STRAWMAN.htm
Think about it: BigInsurance sends you to one of these psychiatric
imaginators if you have chronic Lyme, while at the same time,
BigInsurance fights against "mental health parity."
BigInsurance tries to get off the hook for paying for Long Term
Disability by saying "psychiatric diseases are not real diseases and
therefore the patient is not sick," while at the same time saying they
"don't have to pay for mental illness treatment because mental
illnesses not real," ... but they send the patients to psychiatrists.
Psychiatrists don't complain about being told "mental illnesses are
not real, so we're not paying for it," - by BigInsurance, while at the
same time, psychiatrists take money for saying "real illnesses are not
real, but we don't know what real illnesses are anyway and routinely
perform our non-science despite all of our psychiatric DSM guidelines
demanding that we perform scientifically valid rule outs."
http://www.actionlyme.org/BIOMARKERS2.htm
^^^ Setting the entire APA (psych.org) up for a *massive* malpractice
class action.
(Think BigInsurance cares?)
The patients have caught in the middle of all of this nonsense for
years because psychiatrists can't admit what they really are and
really do, and most of all, ignore completely the topic of EVIL:
http://www.actionlyme.org/andersonpenisbiter.htm
^^^ Read about "psychopathic profiling" by the infamous Andrea Yates
Imaginator, Park Dietz.
This psychiatric quackery is also the main problem we Lyme victims
have with the incompetent ILADS.org
They, ILADS.org, won't renounce psychiatric quess-o-metrical
superimaginating:
http://www.actionlyme.org/070430.htm
How can ILADS.org start screaming about "scientific validity and
the Lyme crimes," if half of their members are psychiatrists and
psychologists?
The last time ILADS did claim "SCIENTIFICALLY INVALID"
was when *I* wrote their 2001-Klempner rebuttal (excluding data
strength analysis, which was perform by URI's Dr. Brand):
http://www.actionlyme.org/MKLEMPNER.htm
It's really time that the world dealt with the down
and dirty on psychiatry because they're obstructing science
and human rights, not to mention *not* helping with the
prosecution of the ALDF/IDSA in this Lyme RICO *FRAUD.*
And then when we're done prosecuting the Lyme crimes
we can focus on this new product Pam2Cys (MALP-2) over
which the medical world is all agog... and patenting their
hinies off.
Guess what, Pam2Cys could be a real vaccine adjuvant, unlike
Pam3Cys, which Yale rammed down our throats,... then threw
psychiatrists down into the pit on top of us, then lit
the fuse and walked away... and come to find out they blew up
their *own* world.
Kathleen M. Dickson
The Pfizer Chemist who solved the entire crime, from Dearborn to
Pam3Cys (OspA) immunosuppression.
http://www.actionlyme.org
===================================================
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/ci_12586451?source=most_emailed
Chronic Lyme disease treatment could face insurance battle
By Brian Lockhart
Staff Writer
Posted: 06/13/2009 10:08:27 PM EDT
Updated: 06/14/2009 10:12:08 AM EDT
Insurance companies could possibly refuse to pay for longer-term
antibiotic treatments for chronic Lyme disease. A bill approved by the
General Assembly and awaiting Gov. M. Jodi Rell's approval would allow
physicians to diagnose chronic Lyme disease without fear of censure by
peers of state health officials. (File Photo)
Many Lyme disease patients rejoiced last month when the General
Assembly unanimously passed a bill specifying that physicians could
diagnose the controversial chronic Lyme disease and prescribe equally
contentious long-term antibiotics to treat the tick-borne illness
without fear of reprisal.
But the bill, which needs to be signed by Republican Gov. M. Jodi
Rell, did not address another issue: Must insurance companies cover
the extended treatments when various health organizations do not
recognize the existence of chronic Lyme and warn against overuse of
antibiotics?
"Even if the governor signs our law and the doctors will be
technically allowed to prescribe (long-term) antibiotics, the
insurance companies only have to pay for so much," said state Rep. Kim
Fawcett, D-Fairfield, who helped spearhead the bill.
Many, including Fawcett's husband, believe they suffer from chronic
Lyme disease. But various groups, from the state-based American Lyme
Disease Foundation to the Infectious Diseases Society of America,
dismiss its existence and caution against prescribing more than 28
days of antibiotic treatment.
Connecticut's chronic Lyme bill is intended to let physicians who wish
to diagnose and treat the disease know they will not face
recrimination from peers or health officials.
Connecticut, where Lyme disease was first identified, has had a unique
law since 2000 mandating a minimum amount of long-term antibiotic
treatment -- "not less than"
Advertisement
Mystic Mom Lost 47 lbs Following 1 rule!I Cut Down 47 lbs of Stomach
Fat In A Month By Obeying This 1 Old Rule Explore Now...Mystic
Residents: Make $63/Hr Part-Time!$63/hr part-time jobs open.
Requirements: Just a computer. Explore Now...
Quantcast
30 days of intravenous therapy, 60 days of oral therapy or both, with
the possibility of longer treatments.
But observers such as Fawcett said they recognize that the law does
not guarantee unlimited coverage for chronic sufferers.
"The science is at best unclear. It was done in response to
overwhelming pressure on legislators from people who clearly were
suffering from something, although it's not at all clear necessarily
it was or is Lyme disease," said Keith Stover, a lobbyist for the
Connecticut Association of Health Plans.
. "It's a heart-wrenching thing. There's no question if you attend
hearings or speak to people they're suffering. (But) it is a very
dangerous thing, we believe ... to be establishing particular courses
of treatment in statute as mandates."
The 2000 antibiotic mandate is expected to garner far more attention
if more physicians begin stepping forward to treat chronic Lyme.
Stover said the health plan association did not oppose this year's
chronic Lyme bill. The group is instead relying on the existing
process insurance companies use to determine "medical necessity" and
patients' and doctors' ability to seek a third-party review of
coverage decisions to grapple with the use of long-term antibiotics.
Fawcett said she has heard of insurance companies declining to cover
continuous long-term antibiotic treatment beyond the 90-day minimum
outlined in the 2000 law. She and state Rep. Betsy Ritter, D-Quaker
Hill, chairman of the legislature's public health committee, said some
chronic Lyme sufferers allege that doctors have been pressured for
years by large insurers not to diagnose or treat the disease to hold
down claims.
"There was some feeling ... insurance companies were getting claims
and didn't want to pay," Ritter said. "But we didn't have opposition
from insurance companies (to the chronic Lyme bill). It seemed to me
it would follow this should not be an issue. If they start denying
coverage, we'll find out."
Problems with antibiotic coverage could be dealt with in the future by
the General Assembly, but Ritter said lawmakers have to be careful not
to go too far.
"(Insurance companies) are often in terrible positions where publicly
they're just vilified in cases where there actually is real abuse in
the system. I understand that," Ritter said. "Insurance mandates can
be a problem because often all that does is create a more fertile
ground for more abuse."
Sarah Yeager, spokeswoman for Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
Connecticut, wrote in an e-mail that the company follows Connecticut's
2000 Lyme treatment law, which also states insurers "shall provide
further treatment if recommended by a board-certified rheumatologist,
infectious disease specialist or neurologist licensed in accordance
with (Connecticut) general statutes."
Robert McDonough, medical director for Aetna's clinical policy unit,
said that the insurer follows the 2000 guidelines. But McDonough also
said Aetna recognizes Lyme disease policies established by the
Infectious Diseases Society and other evidence "that concludes there
really is no reliable scientific evidence to support the need for very
prolonged courses of antibiotics for Lyme."
"It's not merely there's a lack of evidence, but these treatments can
have serious and even fatal adverse effects," McDonough said. "Highly
virulent resistant organisms can take hold, or other adverse effects
can occur. It's not an innocuous treatment. "¦ It's more of a question
of whether we would say at some point to stop it."
Kevin Lembo, who, as the state's health care advocate, assists
residents denied coverage by insurers, said his office has dealt with
Lyme disease issues, but he was uncertain whether any involved the use
of long-term antibiotic treatments.
Lembo said he suspects that will change if Rell passes the chronic
Lyme bill and more doctors feel free to diagnose and treat the
controversial illness.
"Whenever we make a case for trying to get a treatment for a patient
considered investigational by the plan, we pull the academic research
and clinical research together and get doctors not actively treating
the patient to weigh in," Lembo said. "It will be interesting to see
what happens when and if we get one of these cases. "¦ Folks are very,
very passionate about this issue."
Staff Writer Brian Lockhart can be reached at brian.l...@scni.com
or (203) 750-5352.
Info Box
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci
lipanz...@aol.com
> �To: brian.lockh...@scni.com, bpc...@norwichdiocese.net,
> scientificintegr...@ostp.gov, pkrug...@princeton.edu,
> Stanley.f...@fiu.edu, emcswee...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
> SpinL...@yahoogroups.com, kshep...@calea.org, fitz...@gmail.com,
> patrick.fitzger...@usdoj.gov, modelt1...@sbcglobal.net,
> jdra...@nejm.org, lett...@courant.com, Jgerberd...@cdc.gov,
> michael.c...@po.state.ct.us, conn...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
> edi...@nytimes.com, managing-edi...@nytimes.com, news-
> t...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, fore...@nytimes.com,
> natio...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidcalla...@optonline.net,
> t...@hotmail.com, illinoisl...@aol.com, jlen...@courant.com,
> tinajgar...@yahoo.com, jhornber...@fff.org, thomas.car...@usdoj.gov,
> thomas.r...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
> georgew...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
> commissioner....@po.state.ct.us, bransfi...@comcast.net,
> vtsh...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freethin...@charter.net,
> scott.mur...@po.state.ct.us, governor.r...@po.state.ct.us,
> attorney.gene...@po.state.ct.us, randall.samb...@usdoj.gov,
> Robert.shil...@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
> harold....@yale.edu, sedmo...@nswbc.org, rrmcgov...@aol.com
> Cc: fran...@ucia.gov, dr-ahmadine...@president.ir,
> eugenerobin...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
> bmil...@newstimes.com, t...@hotmail.com, rastr...@aol.com,
> billcurr...@gmail.com, amcgui...@rms-law.com, rjmur...@aol.com,
> paulcraigrobe...@yahoo.com, sidney_blument...@yahoo.com,
> criminal.divis...@usdoj.gov, karla.dobin...@usdoj.gov,
> christopher.chris...@usdoj.gov, richard.Le...@yale.edu,
> harold....@yale.edu, james.phill...@yale.edu, inqu...@aldf.com,
> l...@idsociety.org, meganmcar...@theatlantic.com,
> bob.dro...@latimes.com
>
> Subject: ADVOCATE: BigInsurance/ALDF throws a hissy fit over CT Lyme
> bill.
>
> Date: Jun 14, 2009 12:03 PM
>
> ARTICLE BELOW
> =========================================
>
> The insurance companies were referring us to psychiatrists, knowing
> psychiatrists don't know the first thing about medicine or
> scientifically valid rule outs. �Whence, upon being diagnosed as
> "crazy," by the psyhchiatric hoes - who *KNOW* they're being hoes - we
> were denied all our long term disability insurance. �Then we ended up
> on the dot guv welfare/Medicare/Medicaid dole, meaning, BigInsurance
> committed a "fraud on the government" by being involved in the ALDF's
> or (203) 750-5352.
> Info Box
>
> "[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. �That's the good
> news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci
the bill.
Same old bull with the PA lyme bill ------going on. I don't know
why it doesn't sink into a lot of these support leasders that no
matter what the finalization of the passed is the governor's big fat
OK. Like I stated before in PA----they have this fat head gov.
Rendell who in Pgh area they call him Swindell - used to be mayor of
Phil. He'll never sign it He will take the ins. cos.
payoffs......plus they put in all those bills etc. that a better blood
test be developed...HOW NAIVE ----they should know that the cdc, fda,
creeps and idsa -don't want a better blood tes - less people diagnosed
less payout for the ins. ccompanies. There was a few drs. esp one
can't think of his name right now -----the CDC it was heard didn't
think it would be as good as it was...Guess who was at the mtg of it
behind closed doors - the devil Steere --the dr. who developed name
started with an S -----the CDC never got back to him -never returned
his calls........the whole thing is criminal and sicko.....evil----and
the beat goes on.
Mort Zuckerman
Rendell is Lyme literate and he knows
about the Sheller lawsuits.
If you think he is not signing a Lyme treatment bill,
then call his office and ask why.
Rendell is a Democrat, no?
Last I heard/knew, he was with us and not the
bad guys.
Kathleen