nadie-no-s...@cotse.com wrote:

> >From: "Jonathan R. Strong" <jstr...@home.com>
> >Newsgroups: sci.med.diseases.lyme
> >Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 12:34 AM
> >Subject: Re: Submitted to FDA with supporting documentation, Jan 31, 2001,
> Bethesda

> > "Kathleen" wrote:
> > > I actually gave this presentation
> > > with slides... as much of it as I
> > > could say in 5-7 minutes.
> > > So it is part of the record, now.
> > >> snip <<

> > K

> > This is great -and the fact that you managed to get the salient points
> >organized and presented
> >is fantastic. So many of us are aware of the issues, know of the
> >injustices and want to make a
> >difference but get mired down in lyme malaise - but *you* actually got it
> >together and
> >delivered it in a way that can make a difference. Bravo - and thanks.

> Actually, it wasn't great.  It was a rambling, buzzsaw critique of the
> Dressler serodiagnostic criteria, with washed out, illegible
> black-and-white overheads.  

> the meeting which was a "Lyme Disease Vaccine Safety Update."  I think the
> only thing it accomplished was to remind the audience that 1) easy access to
> scientific and medical information is no substitute for real knowledge and
> 2) "some of these people are nuts."

> It wasn't helped that this off-topic diatribe was preceded by Karen
> Forschner's awkward wiggling between the fact of her taking $120,000 from
> SKB and having to admit she didn't take the vaccine herself or give it to
> her kid, followed by a lawyer disingenuously asking the Committee to suspend
> vaccine usage and thereby strengthening his case against SKB.

> Almost lost in this theater of bad one-act plays was the small but
> interesting number of personal stories about adverse events that seemed to
> follow the second Lymerix shot.  Maybe second shot events are a common
> factor and will be looked at in greater detail.
> --
> --