Lyme Fraud Explainer, Simple Version
kathleen
If you all could just print these out and put them all together in one
place, and llook at them as one relatively small package of data, you
will see how Lyme is scientific fraud.
First for the fun stuff: Edward McSweegan and Durland Fish conspire to
send the Lyme Foundation "a bogus article."
http://actionlyme.org/TICK_BITE_CONSPIRACY.htm and see how Allen
Steere changed the standard for Lyme from his original one where
changing and expanding IgM and IgG antibodies were diagnostic of Lyme
to one where only IgG should be analyzed (Jail4U Allen Boyo).
1) The attached document is a graphical explainer on how people with
neuroborreliosis don't tend to have the hypersensitivity reaction
(allergy) to Borrelial lipoproteins. That is, they have a lower
concentration of antibodies, to their Western Blots appear faint (and
this link now works):
http://actionlyme.org/USDOJ_COMPLAINT_RICO.htm
2) This is a Yale report, which is about 5 pages, and in the last few
paragraphs, Yale's Erol Fikrig is discussing what is wrong with OspA
vaccination- read especially the last few paragraphs:
http://iai.asm.org/cgi/reprint/63/5/1658?view=reprint&pmid=7729870
3) This is the original CDC standard, in which Allen Steere describes
Lyme borreliosis as a relapsing fever organism, and that ***changing
and expanding IgM and IgG antibodies is diagnostic*** (see the last few
paragraphs, at least):
http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=423723&blobtype=pdf
Later CDC left these IgM antibodies basically out of the serodiagnostic
standard. (The consensus is that no one figure out what CDC thinks
they are doing.)
4) Here is the CDC saying the same thing in 1990:
http://actionlyme.org/CDC_DOCUMENTS_1990.htm
5) Here is myself, explaining what happened with LymeRIX, and what
happened at Dearborn, only those last couple of pages were put on the
FDA's website in the wrong order:
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3680s2_11.pdf
6) Here is the Yale Flagellin method, which is about 94% accurate:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1894359&query_hl=1
As you can see, Daniel Rahn is an author of that report.
The US patent for that is 5,618,533, and was applied for in 1993.
7) Here is Pam3Cys, which is what is unique about OspA (LymeRIX):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=PureSearch&db=pubmed&details_term=pam3cys%5BAll%20Fields%5D%20AND%20immune%5BAll%20Fields%5D
Immune suppression/dysregulation.
8) Here is Corixa and SmithKline now joined as one company, creating
allergy vaccines based on what they learned about OspA, and part of the
story is that some people are immune suppressed due to these kinds of
lipoproteins, which are only represented in *fungal* antigens like
OspA:
http://www.corixa.com/default.asp?pid=products
THAT IS, people with chronic Lyme, or post-LymeRIX syndrome are immune
suppressed, particularly as regards mycoplasmal and mycobacterial
infections, but also as regards all infections, becuase as you can see,
Yale is also now interested in the damage they have done activating
Epstein-Barr:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Yale+and+epstein-Barr+fikrig&btnG=Google+Search
Which was what Paul Duray noted in 1992 about how lymphocytes of
chronic Lyme patients looked in Steve Schutzer's 1992 book, "Lyme
disease, Molecular and Immunological Approaches."
STARI is a bovine borreliosis.
J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Feb;39(2):494-7. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read Click here to read
Lone star tick-infecting borreliae are most closely related to the
agent of bovine borreliosis.
Rich SM, Armstrong PM, Smith RD, Telford SR 3rd.
Division of Infectious Disease, Tufts University School of
Veterinary Medicine, North Grafton, Massachusetts, USA.
Although Borrelia theileri, the agent of bovine borreliosis, was
described at the turn of the century (in 1903), its relationship with
borreliae causing Lyme disease or relapsing fever remains undescribed.
We tested the previously published hypothesis that spirochetes
infecting Lone Star ticks (Amblyomma
americanum) may comprise B. theileri by analyzing the 16S ribosomal
DNAs (rDNAs) and flagellin genes of these spirochetes. B. theileri, the
Amblyomma agent, and B. miyamotoi formed a natural group or clade
distinct from but most closely related to that of the relapsing fever
spirochetes. B. theileri and the
Amblyomma agent were 97 and 98% similar at the nucleotide level within
the analyzed portions of the 16S rDNA and the flagellin gene
respectively, suggesting a recent divergence. The agent of bovine
borreliosis might be explored as a surrogate antigen for the
as-yet-uncultivatable Amblyomma agent in studies designed to explore
the etiology of a Lyme disease-like infection associated with Lone Star
ticks.
PMID: 11158095 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
zipzip
i wish you take your findings and studies and publish them in book form
for peer review and public discussion rather than posting them on
sci.med.lyme, because it's superfluous, at best.
i've seen less interesting books published with a wide circulation.
all you need is a good editor.
afterall, facts are a commodity in the marketplace of ideas. and, at
least, polemic hypothesis' are profitable as well.
cheerio
zip
derdritt...@yahoo.com
kathleen wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> If you all could just print these out and put them all together in one
> place, and llook at them as one relatively small package of data, you
> will see how Lyme is scientific fraud.
NO...we wouldn't.
WHY NOT?
Because it is NOT enough to just be WRONG.
For "FRAUD"...you have to INTEND to DECEIVE...you must KNOW of the
falsity.
This requires you to prove that the "LYme CrYmYnals" KNEW they were
WRONG.
LMAO. Good luck with that.
THEHICKWITHLYME
<derdritt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1127510357.9...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
derdritt...@yahoo.com
THEHICKWITHLYME wrote:
> hey dirtman,what do you know that we dont,your never with the lymies....
Well, to answer you question about what do I know that you don't...the
answer here is...
...I know what the definition of "fraud" is.
When you say that I'm "never with the Lymies"...well, that's a matter
of perspective...
...I prefer to think that I'm never with those that would LIE to the
Lymies.
Cytyzens Agaynst Lyme Cryme
> > Greetings,
> >
> > If you all could just print these out and put them all together in one
> > place, and llook at them as one relatively small package of data, you
> > will see how Lyme is scientific fraud.
>
>
> NO...we wouldn't.
Hey dirtman, what IS this _"we"_ business?
You got fleas?
Because I know you don't have spirochetes.
CaLc
over...@hotmail.com
Some of it needs translation, especially for people like me. If we
could get you and a translator together and get it printed, even
informally, wouldn't that be a great thing!
dali
to take me a while to fully grok everything. I wonder how much
(especially the Yale Flagellin method test and LimRIX) is pure and
simple coverup of 'Epidemic Borreliosis'.
Lets not forget about the dearth of information concerning borrelia and
matters of importance. The pieces do seam to fit Kathleen...
mockingbird
there is no question that horrific crimes have been and are being
committed by the steerites.
over...@hotmail.com
Some of us are simpler than others apparently.
Not clear to me why Yale would have the patent for a sure fire lyme
test but not use it. This would be a big money maker. Wouldn't this
still depend on the immune system producing antibodies, which seems not
to happen in some chronic cases until treatment knocks down the disease.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
overma...@hotmail.com wrote:
Yes, that seems like a reasonable question.
But a patent doesn't necessarily mean that the idea is useful or
marketable.
Please notice that the document suggests that the test MAY be useful in
the diagnosis of Lyme disease.
I have never been able to find WHERE this 94.4% number Kathleen throws
out in regard to this test comes from.
Care to explain, Kathleen?
Anyone?
kathleen
Neither SmithKline nor Kaiser would
profit from finding Lyme, since SmithKline
never had a vaccine, and Lyme is expensive
to treat. Therefore, they do not want to
detect Lyme disease.
Kathleen
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Then Kathleen should have NO PROBLEM proving that in court.
We'll all just wait and see how she does.
Meantime...I'd sure like to see any "proof" you can provide us...other
than your blanket "there's no question" conclusions.
See, problem you have is you conclude what you WANT to...regardless of
the facts or evidence.
Same way you continue to make FALSE statements about myself. It's
simply what you find more convenient to believe.
At the same time...why don't you provide us with some evidence that
supports the FALSE statements you have made about me?
Fact is, you're just a liar.
Live in your f---ed up fantasy world...hell, I don't care...but don't
try to drag others in there with you.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Why don't you ask her to explain it, then?
Is there a problem?
I'm sure she will respond to a simple, polite request to answer
questions.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Nonsense.
That makes NO sense.
If the test was reliable and as accurate as you say, it would have gone
into production and replaced virtually every other existing test.
They would have received patent royalties and profit on the use for
diagnosis alone.
Suggesting that people dont't want to diagnose Lyme disease unless they
have a vaccine is just...ridiculous.
LymeRayja
mockingbird wrote:
>
> Curiously, several tests which appear to have potential in detecting
> late borreliosis, such as Dattwyler's 1988 T-cell test and the fikrig
> fla41, have been allowed to languish. I can't answer as to exactly why.
> I am interested in finding out.
Yes.
Imagine you are a biowarfare scientist with a brief to conceal
information regarding the nature, extent and seriousness of a Lyme
disease/borreliosis pandemic.
You need a reliable indicator of incidence , but you don't want the
sufferers told that they have Lyme disease.
In Britain, a **highly** specific recombinant portion of the 41 kd
antigen is used, roughly analogous to the test Kathleen referred to.
But when people react to this antigen, it is scored on a western blot
with only one point, where you need 7 or more to pass.
Lisa
>
> I suspect those in the early 90's who plotted this strategy, who
> recognized that late lyme was a likely a major cause of chronic fatigue
> and "affective" mood disorders ($$$billions to skb for paxil), I think
> they, being rheumatologists and ID specialists were terrified by the
> development of SPECT and PET in measuring metabolic abnormalities in
> the brain. These represent a major threat to their schemes. Note,
> fallon's study was not funded by NIAIDS, it was funded by NIMDS...
>
> anthony fauci, eis, and idsa...they are the crooks here.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
> Meantime...I'd sure like to see any "proof" you can provide us...other
> than your blanket "there's no question" conclusions. >>>
>
> articles. Kathleen's website is a good starting point.
No...I asked YOU what proof...or even EVIDENCE you have. I am REALLY
sick and tired of having that question answered with an imbecilic "read
Kathleen's website". I've tried. It's not something sane people should
attempt unless they have previously ingested some sort of mind-numbing
substance.(Like the stuff you seem to be on).
>
> probably the worst aspect of these scandals is the fact that the wb
> criteria only apply to early manifestations of lyme. As borrelia
> undergo antigenic variation, heavily passaged strains (and this has
> been shown experimentally) do not express the same antigens > antibody
> as would be detected in the average early lyme WB...steere, I think,
> used two strains in his assays...but he was only concerned with
> detecting early lyme arthritis.
Assuming everything you say is true...how is that "fraud"?
>
> Individuals who do not seek diagnosis until years after a tick bite are
> at a two-fold disadvantage: (1) because the bacteria has been inside
> them a long time, it has been heavily passaged, ie, it has evolved over
> generations to express a different set of antigens...remember,
> different proteins are expressed in the tick as opposed to the
> mammalian host...(2) and this propensity for antigenic variation
> appears to differ among strains...so that the immune response will be
> strain dependent, and also dependent upon host genetic and
> environmental factors.
Assuming everything you say is true, how is that "fraud"?
>
> Basically, with lyme disease, if you do not recive an early diagnosis,
> you are written off by the medical community. The disease has become
> chronic and ineradicable, and undetectable given current standards of
> serologic diagnosis. It doesn't fit in with the managed care
> environment.
Assuming everything you say is true, how is that "fraud"?
>
> Curiously, several tests which appear to have potential in detecting
> late borreliosis, such as Dattwyler's 1988 T-cell test and the fikrig
> fla41, have been allowed to languish. I can't answer as to exactly why.
> I am interested in finding out.
So am I. But in the absence of information, it is highly IRRESPONSIBLE
(and probably defammmatory), to insist that it is either "criminal" or
fraudulent. THIS is the problem. reaching conclusions and stating them
to be fact without all the necessary information. Believing what we
want to believe.
And...the question for you and other like-"minded"(notice the quotation
marks, there) individuals...is WHY is it, that you WANT to believe the
WORST about certain people?
>
> I suspect those in the early 90's who plotted this strategy, who
> recognized that late lyme was a likely a major cause of chronic fatigue
> and "affective" mood disorders ($$$billions to skb for paxil), I think
> they, being rheumatologists and ID specialists were terrified by the
> development of SPECT and PET in measuring metabolic abnormalities in
> the brain. These represent a major threat to their schemes. Note,
> fallon's study was not funded by NIAIDS, it was funded by NIMDS...
You just stated, "I suspect"...I assume you understand that ain't near
good enough. Gotta do better than that, Chief.
>
> anthony fauci, eis, and idsa...they are the crooks here.
It would be nice if rather than just repeating that over and over and
over...you actually provide SOMETHING...ANYTHING...that
resembled...even remotely...
...evidence that suggested an actual crime had been committed rather
than a legitimate difference of academic and scientific OPINION.
You see, by continuing to insist that "crimes" and "fraud" have been
committed, you seem to be implicitly stating that there is no way in
which these things could have occurred through the normal scientific
processes...
...and that is simply NOT TRUE.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
LymeRayja wrote:
> mockingbird wrote:
>
> >
> > Curiously, several tests which appear to have potential in detecting
> > late borreliosis, such as Dattwyler's 1988 T-cell test and the fikrig
> > fla41, have been allowed to languish. I can't answer as to exactly why.
> > I am interested in finding out.
>
> "Yes.
> "Imagine you are a biowarfare scientist..."
NO!!!
Let's don't "imagine" any damn thing.
How about we stick to known, provable FACTS and the resonable
conclusions and inferences that can be drawn from them?
Want to try, for once?
kathleen
It's clear Weisman/Dritte can't read.
This has been his problem all along.
He isn't a scientist. It's that simple.
He doesn't even know what a FACT *is.*
Kathleen
dali
mockingbird wrote:
>
> Curiously, several tests which appear to have potential in detecting
> late borreliosis, such as Dattwyler's 1988 T-cell test and the fikrig
> fla41, have been allowed to languish. I can't answer as to exactly why.
> I am interested in finding out.
>
> I suspect those in the early 90's who plotted this strategy, who
> recognized that late lyme was a likely a major cause of chronic fatigue
> and "affective" mood disorders ($$$billions to skb for paxil), I think
> they, being rheumatologists and ID specialists were terrified by the
> development of SPECT and PET in measuring metabolic abnormalities in
> the brain. These represent a major threat to their schemes. Note,
> fallon's study was not funded by NIAIDS, it was funded by NIMDS...
>
> anthony fauci, eis, and idsa...they are the crooks here.
Very interesting.I believe Kathleen even mentioned where the data on
one experiment is now simply missing. LymeRIX I believe?
Can this be a coverup?
It would be very easy to squash this type of stuff. Can you say
National Security.
over...@hotmail.com
to toe the gov't line on this disease and continue to get big NIH
bucks. Not saying this happened, because there have been so many lyme
tests that make big claims about accuracy, and turn out not to be much
good in the end. That usually does not prevent them from earning a lot
of money, if they are marketed.
That's the problem with having the makers/patent holders of these
things do the testing. They are checked against known strain(s) to see
if they can detect what they were designed to detect. Nothing at all
said about covering enough genetic diversity or antigenic variation in
the host over time, seclusion from immune system, etc.
(PS. Why is the "d.mann" so hostile? To everyone? And so repetitious?
I don't plan to come back and read his blast in reply.)
kathleen
Because he is not a scientist, and *is* a sociopath
and he knows this is true. I am familiar with the type.
Once you are their prey, forget it.
My Ex constantly watches this newsgroup for every little
thing I post.
The two of them are obsessed with destroying me, when in
fact, the reason they are sociopaths is because they haven't
the intelligence nor the will to do anything constructive.
It's so simple. "Do your homework."
GET A LIFE.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
kathleen wrote:
>
> It's clear Weisman/Dritte can't read.
> This has been his problem all along.
>
> He isn't a scientist. It's that simple.
>
> He doesn't even know what a FACT *is.*
>
> Kathleen
First...I am NOT "Weisman". I would assume most others around here
understand this. When you constantly repeat this...it only serves to
demonstrate the sort of disconnected thought process that structures
suppositions, speculations and conjecture...
...and then transforms them magically into "facts".
Second...try answering a question for ONCE. YOU made the claims about
the accuracy of this so-called "test". Where did those number scome
from? WHY wasn't this "test" ever presnted or marketed...but merely
patented?
Third...(and this is a good one)...HEY! You've got TWO...(count
'em)...TWO separate Federal lawsuits CURRENTLY pending dealing with the
subject matter of what you are discussing here.
ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND? (rhetorical question, some of us know the
answer)...you have to be absolutely INSANE to be sitting here mouthing
off about this stuff...let alone have a WEBSITE up and running devoted
to the same materials...
...while this litigation is pending.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
kathleen wrote:
>
>>
> GET A LIFE.
I'll do better, Kathleen...I'll go away for good if you win either one
of your lawsuits...
...all you have to do is promise to do the same if you lose.
Since you know so damn muuch about every damn thing...pretty safe bet
for you, I'd say.
Whaddya say?
C'mon?
Wassa matter?
NO NADS?
LMAO.
FRAUD!!!
derdritt...@yahoo.com
kathleen wrote:
>
>
> "Because he is not a scientist, ..."
And YOU are...is that right?
Tell us, Kathleen, what qualifies you for this designation,
"scientist", please?
Where was it again, that you went to school?...(being self-proclaimed
"off-the charts-brilliant")?
Wasn't it...East Connecticut State...something or the other? Behind the
bowling alley across from the filling station down by the laundromat?
Around here...when there is a "direction" (E,N,S,W)preceeding the name
of the school...and a "state" behind it...
...we don't call people with a BS from one of those: "scientists"...we
usually call them "junior high school science teachers".
So...you swabbed out some petri dishes at Pfizer, and claim
responsibility for working on a drug that even the FDA claims kills
people...other than that...
...what are your qualifications as a "scientist"?
derdritt...@yahoo.com
over...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> (PS. Why is the "d.mann" so hostile? To everyone? And so repetitious?
> I don't plan to come back and read his blast in reply.)
Well, maybe it has to do with going over the same material over and
over and over...
...with people who are present or former MENTAL PATIENTS.
That's right.
Two of the people who are "contributing" to this discussion, here, have
been previously confined for maanagement of serious mental/emotional
problems.
And when some dipshits then come in here and encourage them...some
people who actually know better are forced to decide whether they
should post responses that offer a sane alternative...
...or just sit back and watch the flow of rabies-laced disinformation
that can be very damaging to newly-infected people who are trying to
find their way through a very confusing picture of Lyme disease and
Lyme politics.
mockingbird
bowling alley across from the filling station down by the laundromat?
>>>
well, you know tufts wasn't good enough for steere...he had to be at
Harvard...
it's this juvenile attitude, which places a heavy elitist focus on
purely societal constructs (aka figments of the imagination) that runs
rampant through the steerite camp...totally delusional, separated from
reality...like the french generals on May 9, 1940.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Uh-huh.
Sounds good coming from "my uncle who runs the hot-damn" research
lab...unc says this, unc says that...
...and YOU are NOT the one to be talking about "totally delusional,
separated from reality", slick.
Maybe I should come to NY (it's WAY more than a commuter trip,
though)...we can have lunch and then we can go over and talk to
Fallon...show him all the statements you have made so very definitely
about who I am and where I live, and etc, etc...like you friggin have a
clue...
...and we'll compare that to the reality...and I'm guessing you are in
for another not-too-pleasant diagnosis.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
> ...with people who are present or former MENTAL PATIENTS. >>>>>
>
>
> "I
> began to experience severe paranoid delusions".
You do realize, don't you...that insisting that I am someone that I am
clearly not(and this can be proven very definitely)...while arguing for
a vast criminal conspiracy involving Lyme disease...
...sort of looks like a "paranoid delusion"?
At times I would become
> convinced that I had various bizarre brain disorders.
Then it's not entirely surprising that others join you in that
assesment, is it?
mockingbird
assesment, is it? >>>
yeah, it's called neuroborreliosis...you know, the problem was I was
very sick, and failed to receive a diagnosis, mostly because the
doctors "on the ground" have been totally misinformed about what lyme
disease can do in the brain...and when you are very sick, you know you
are sick, and you can't get a diagnosis, you tend to go a little
crazy...especially when the disease is attacking your brain...and
complicated by B12 deficiency ( which in itself can cause dementia),
also, I might add, inflicting hormonal damage (I have to replace
several hormones)...etc.
Unfortunately, neuroborreliosis is not at all "bizarre" or unique...it
is very common. What is not common is finding an academic researcher
who is able to acknowledge that he is or was wrong about something - or
is able to overcome his greed for money and power and exhibit a shred
of integrity...and untold thousands suffer because of this juvenile,
elitist country club attitude which prevails in fauci's ID "vision".
like drittemann, the main concern of most of these individuals in
question is what school they are at, what kind of import they drive,
and whether or not they can afford a stradivarious violin...they do not
have any understanding or empathy for individuals with neuropsychiatric
disease...it's a bunch of fossilized stultified pedantic nerds in their
50's and 60's stuck living out adolescent materialistic fantasies which
revolve around constructing an illusional world in which everything is
wonderful, and they get to pen all the important articles and work at
Harvard or Yale...Yip the fuckk-eee. Most of them have failed or
miserable marriages.
Emotional 3 year olds, totally lacking in perspective, experience, or
breadth of knowledge. That's the sort of person who mocks and represses
individuals who have experienced organic brain disease.
They have sown the wind. They will reap the whirlwind.
dali
stated:
>In Britain, a **highly** specific recombinant portion of the 41 kd
>antigen is used, roughly analogous to the test Kathleen referred to.
>
>But when people react to this antigen, it is scored on a western blot
>with only one point, where you need 7 or more to pass.
>Lisa
>
Just to get this straight in me muddled head. In England if you test
positive for this specific antigen you have lyme and in america your
about 1/8 there in proving the same?
kathleen
No. In England you have to have 7 points
and flagellin counts as 1 point.
In the USA, it would be like 1 point in 5.
It's a lot tougher to have Lyme in Europe, because
SmithKline basically owns it.
As you know, you don't have the disease they don't
have a vaccine for.
So, they invented "Lyme disease" from Borreliosis.
"Lyme disease" is that thing with the knee that Dattwyler
sees about 2 case a year of, and Klempner found only 78
out of 2000 of them.
It's very rare.
Kathleen
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
>
>"...like drittemann, the main concern of most of these individuals in
> question is what school they are at, what kind of import they drive,
> and whether or not they can afford a stradivarious violin...they do not
> have any understanding or empathy for individuals with neuropsychiatric
> disease...it's a bunch of fossilized stultified pedantic nerds in their
> 50's and 60's stuck living out adolescent materialistic fantasies which
> revolve around constructing an illusional world in which everything is
> wonderful, and they get to pen all the important articles and work at
> Harvard or Yale...Yip the fuckk-eee. Most of them have failed or
> miserable marriages".
Listen to yourself...
...how do you know all of this? Do you know these people?
Clearly you do not.
This is what you WISH to think. You are fictionalizing and fantasizing
to the point where you cannot seem to separate reality from fiction.
You are projecting qualities unto an entire group of people...merely
because you NEED to...you are demonizing and mocking them, apparently
because you have a deep-seated desire to BLAME someone...anyone...for
the misfortune that has befallen you.
I hope you will be seeing Fallon soon.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
,
> and whether or not they can afford a stradivarious violin...
Oh, and by the way...StradiVARIUS...not "various"...
...or to an Okie...
..."uh gol-durned fiddle".
mockingbird
>>>
Oh by the way...it's ONTO, not "unto"...
...hypocrite
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Correct.
I apologize...profusely. Probably the first time you have ever
encountered one of those...coming from Oklahoma and all...you must be
stunned.
But...that's a grammatical error...that doesn't make me a "hypocrite",
there, slick.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
> ...how do you know all of this? Do you know these people? >>>
>
>
You DO? Really?
>
> I know what eugene shapiro has done and said. I know what durland fish
> has done and said. I know what allen steere has done and said. etc.
Ohhhh...I see. You just "know" them through what you have read and what
other equally obsessed and disturbed individuals have said about them.
Wonderful. Yes. Excellent.
>
> And I know what I and thousands of other people have experienced as a
> direct result of this malfeasance.
Perhaps.
>
> <<<You are projecting qualities unto an entire group of people...merely
>
> because you NEED to...you are demonizing and mocking them, apparently
> because you have a deep-seated desire to BLAME someone...anyone...for
> the misfortune that has befallen you. >>>
>
>
> that's like telling a jew who survived auschwitz that the SS was not
> responsible for their misfortune...it's the jew's fault that they were
> in the wrong ghetto at the wrong time...it's the jew's fault that they
> got on the train even though they had a gun pointed at them...etc.
No, it really isn't.
(And that is a DISGUSTING and perverse analogy which I find personally
offensive and you are a supreme ASSHOLE for suggesting it. What gives
you the right to be such an abusive jerk? You think that somehow your
illness gives you carte blanche to be rude, stupid and abusive)?
Please try to remember (assuming that you actually do have Lyme
disease)that you are ill because A BUG BIT YOU.
Assuming that you would have fared better if only certain doctors had
better informed the medical population according to YOUR interpretaions
of the disease...
...is an ASSUMPTION that you have made.
>
> Drittemann, the holocaust denier.
Oh, piss off. That's really childish...even for you.
THEHICKWITHLYME
for lyme opposition...
dali
>> that's like telling a jew who survived auschwitz that the SS was not
>> responsible for their misfortune...it's the jew's fault that they were
>> in the wrong ghetto at the wrong time...it's the jew's fault that they
>> got on the train even though they had a gun pointed at them...etc.
hmmm motives. I think the ones who implemented this lyme policy had a
realistic view of the world. Traditional antibiotics are not a serious
contender against Epidemic Borreliosis. My guess...policy was
implemented to save the ones they could. If this were the case certain
test would be geared for a certain infectious types (the salvagable
one). I believe I read something from overnman which deals with that.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
>
> LMFAO..."assuming that you actually do have lyme disease"? Sounds like
> something eugene shapiro would say...I suppose my blood and CSF tests
> have all been false positives...and the plaques on my brain are a
> mirage...not to mention the spect scan, neuropsych testing,
> etc...drittemann, I was CDC positive...they could use me for research
> purposes...
No, actually it sounds like something YOU would say to others
here...accuse other patients of being impostors...think about it.
My word wasn't good enough for you.
>
>
> There is no difference between mark klempner and allen steere and
> rudolf hoss. In a sense, the klempners of the world are worse, because
> their only motivation is personal greed and ambition, whereas hoss at
> least killed out of conviction.
Who is Rudolph "Hoss"?
You mean "Hess"?
Hess flew to Britain in an ME 110 and parachuted into Scotland in what
some believe was an attempt to rally aristocratic elements and fascist
sympathizers to a negotiated peace with Germany.
What in the HELL are you talking about?
I think "Hoss" was the big guy on "Bonanza".
>
> Your failure to understand the depth and repurcussions of the actions
> of your buddies is symbolic of the juvenility, shallowness, and
> separation from reality which exists in the twilight world of academic
> lyme research.
"My buddies"?
You are seriously delusional. (This is a fancy term for "fucked up",
hoss).
mockingbird
You mean "Hess"?
Hess flew to Britain in an ME 110 and parachuted into Scotland in what
some believe was an attempt to rally aristocratic elements and fascist
sympathizers to a negotiated peace with Germany.
What in the HELL are you talking about?
I think "Hoss" was the big guy on "Bonanza". >>>>>
LMFAO. I knew that one would get you....rudolph hoss (sometimes spelled
hoess, or with an umlatt ..) was the commandant of auschwitz, you
idiot...don't waste time trying to impress me with your inadequate
knowledge of ww2/ german history or really history in general. note,
hess was as you describe...may 1941...disillusioned by the distance
which had grown between he and hitler since the war, hEss flew to
england - later feigned insanity...and ended up spending the rest of
his life in prison, as the soviets insisted he serve out his term.
mockingbird
autobiography, written in jail prior to being "terminated".
LymeRayja
over...@hotmail.com wrote:
> (PS. Why is the "d.mann" so hostile? To everyone? And so repetitious?
> I don't plan to come back and read his blast in reply.)
Cos he's a paid whore for the Steere camp.
Lisa
LymeRayja
have both the ordinary flagellin (41 kd) and an antigen called "41 int"
on the immunoblot used here.
I'll explain it more comprehensively. If you have Lyme in Britian, and
you are fortunate enough to be one of the 0.00000000000001% of Lymies
who actually manage to discover what you have, you could then ask for a
blood test.
This will be conducted according to the combined wisdom of the CDC and
Dr Bettina Wilske, Steere camp's top microbiologist in Europe. That is
assuming, of course , that the Southampton Reference lab does not
refuse to do the test your doctor ordered in the first place (as a
British GP once confided in me).
Assuming you have got that far, and assuming you have actually got a
positive Elisa result (despite the fact that Elisa's are notoriously
insensitive), your blood may then be tested by Immunoblot (western
blot). An Immunoblot in use here is the Mikrogen Rekomblot, owned by Dr
Wilske's colleagues, and the recombinant technology of which is
patented by - you guessed it - Dr Wilske.
If anyone doubts what I said, have a browse in the US government
patents database.
Anyway, Mikrogen include on their western blot the "41 internal "
antigen, which is a portion of the middle of the normal flagellin (41
kd) protein, produced by recombinant technology. These piece was chosen
because of its **extreme specificity** - it is not cross-reactive, as
the rest of the flagellin protein apparently is. Dr Wilske mentions
this fact herself in her MIQ 2000 document, hailed by the CDC and the
European Steerites as the Lyme Bible for Europe.
However, if you should happen to get a reaction to this 41 int band,
you will receive only one point, on a Western Blot where you need 7 or
more points to be considered positive. The ordinary 41 kd band is also
one point. In other words, even though Dr Wilske and her friendly
company have praised the 41 int antigen to the skies for its
specificity, suddenly, when it comes to addng up scores on the western
blot, it's worth no more than the everyday, mundane 41 kd antigen,
which both the Steere camp and most of the honest camp of doctors
consider cross-reactive.
Of course even the tiny percentage of people in Britain who get as far
as suspecting they have Lyme and having a blot done, generally don't
find this out. They are not given their test results with a break-down
of which bands they reacted to, so they will never know if they reacted
to this highly specific 41 int antigen or not. Their doctors are merely
sent a brief statement claiming the result was negative.
Of course, they are entitled to demand the information - including
full details of bands reacted to - under the Data Protection Act.
However, even so, they are likely to encounter a lot of resistance from
Dr O'Connell at the corrupt Southampton Reference Lab. In my opinion -
pure speculation - threatening a court order tends to help.
Lisa
LymeRayja
> LymeRayja wrote:
>
> > "Imagine you are a biowarfare scientist..."
Dirtman panicked:
>
> NO!!!
>
> Let's don't "imagine" any damn thing.
>
> How about we stick to known, provable FACTS and the resonable
> conclusions and inferences that can be drawn from them?
>
Aw, yerright, dirtman. Let's stick to known provable facts.
FACT: The following leading Steere camp doctors and researchers are all
members of the elite Epidemic Intelligence Service founded by Cold War
biowarfaremen, or are otherwise military or biowarfare experts:
Allen Steere, Alan Barbour, Mark Klempner, Ed McSweegan, Jorge Benach,
David Dennis, Captain Paul Mead.
That's just a taste.
Lisa
kathleen
Well due to the lies about Lyme, we were
prevented from knowing the seriousness of
the disease, and how seriously we had to
prevent it, say, by getting rid of the deer.
So, this fraud over the vaccine caused a huge
degree of disability on several continents and
guess what? It was all McSweegan's idea.
The day after I faxed this information about
McSweegan and his correspondence with Senator
Goldwater about how incompetent the Department of
the Navy is, a false warrant was made out for my
false arrest and now I have a gag order not to
criticize the government
Later McSweegan said I should not "mess with
Yale and the Federal Govt."
It appears that "Yale and the Federal Govt," messed
with us.
Kathleen
derdritt...@yahoo.com
LymeRayja wrote:
> >
>
>
> Aw, yerright, dirtman. Let's stick to known provable facts.
>
> FACT: The following leading Steere camp doctors and researchers are all
> members of the elite Epidemic Intelligence Service founded by Cold War
> biowarfaremen, or are otherwise military or biowarfare experts:
>
> Allen Steere, Alan Barbour, Mark Klempner, Ed McSweegan, Jorge Benach,
> David Dennis, Captain Paul Mead.
>
> That's just a taste.
> Lisa
Okay...first...it would be nice if you would provide links or something
so we can confirm this assertion.
Second...ASSUMING thta is all true...what conclusion(s) do you think
are appropriate?
What is it that you think we should be able to infer from this "fact"?
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Well then WHY didn't you spell it H-O-E-S-S to dstinguish Hoess from
Hess, hoss?
Gosh...your misspelling certainly did confuse me there. Gee, I'm just
humiliated, now...however will I be able to look myself in the mirror
and shave?
When did this turn into a history exam about Nazi Germany? What is it
with you that you keep mentioning Mengele, Goebbels and Hess?( IT'S
over...you missed out on it. Sorry).
Sooo...let me get this straight...so what you are saying is that you
are comparing the INTENTIONAL mass MURDER of millions of Jews, Gypsies,
Poles, Russinans...
...forcibly herded from all parts of Europe to be systematically
exterminated...
...and you are comparing THIS to getting a bacteraila infection from a
BUG BITE?
Don't you think that's a bit of a rhetorical excess, there, hoss?
Don't you think that you might want to think about how that sort of
thing actually demeans the experience of holocaust survivors?
Don't you think you should print your statements out and show them to
Fallon? (hopefully soon).
dali
LymeRayja wrote:
>
> However, if you should happen to get a reaction to this 41 int band,
> you will receive only one point, on a Western Blot where you need 7 or
> more points to be considered positive. The ordinary 41 kd band is also
> one point. In other words, even though Dr Wilske and her friendly
> company have praised the 41 int antigen to the skies for its
> specificity, suddenly, when it comes to addng up scores on the western
> blot, it's worth no more than the everyday, mundane 41 kd antigen,
> which both the Steere camp and most of the honest camp of doctors
> consider cross-reactive.
>
muchas gracias! this is all new info. The games being played with these
antigens. Appears like there is one goal behind it. Deny as many as
possible. Thanks again.
mockingbird
Hess, hoss?>>>
more often, H-O-S-S is used, including I believe in his autobiography,
written in jail prior to his being hung in 1947 in Poland...hoess would
be even more confusing, because hess (remember, we are dealing with
anglicizations) could be more easily confused here.
yes, I compare the stunning ignorance and bigotry displayed by the
medical elitists in the case of borrelial infection to the holocaust.
There are many parallels...fauci (hitler) in cooperation with his
idsa/eis troopers (the ss) disseminating propaganda (goebbels) which
brainwashes the general medical profession (the german people) into
becoming unwitting accomplices in the repression and extermination of a
class of citizen (lyme victims/jews)...I would doubt that the total
numbers of those affected as of yet reaches the numbers achieved in the
holocaust...I generally accept the number of 1 million people in the US
who either have the disease, or have it dormant or causing very subtle
neuropsych symptoms..certainly the number who have died, probably in
the thousands at this point, does not compare to the number killed in
the holocaust, but here you are talking about a difference of degree,
not kind...and the numbers of lives, effectively destroyed, condemned
to the utter hell of suffering from severe neuropsych symptoms due to
massive barriers in obtaining diagnosis and treatment erected by the
propaganda campaign, probably numbers at this point in the tens if not
hundreds of thousands and will only increase as time goes
on...remember, neurosyphilis usually lays dormant or incubates for
10-15 years..and the lyme spirochete has been shown to do the
same...what we are seeing now and in the next decade will be a dramatic
increase in late neuroborreliosis initially contracted during the
1990's.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
> Well then WHY didn't you spell it H-O-E-S-S to dstinguish Hoess from
> Hess, hoss?>>>
>
> more often, H-O-S-S is used, including I believe in his autobiography,
> written in jail prior to his being hung in 1947 in Poland...hoess would
> be even more confusing, because hess (remember, we are dealing with
> anglicizations) could be more easily confused here.
It is customary to spell German names that contain an umlaut above the
"o" as "oe". For instance, Goring=Goering.
Hope that helps.
>
> yes, I compare the stunning ignorance and bigotry displayed by the
> medical elitists in the case of borrelial infection to the holocaust.
>
> There are many parallels...fauci (hitler) in cooperation with his
> idsa/eis troopers (the ss) disseminating propaganda (goebbels) which
> brainwashes the general medical profession (the german people) into
> becoming unwitting accomplices in the repression and extermination of a
> class of citizen (lyme victims/jews)...I would doubt that the total
> numbers of those affected as of yet reaches the numbers achieved in the
> holocaust...I generally accept the number of 1 million people in the US
> who either have the disease, or have it dormant or causing very subtle
> neuropsych symptoms..certainly the number who have died, probably in
> the thousands at this point, does not compare to the number killed in
> the holocaust, but here you are talking about a difference of degree,
> not kind...and the numbers of lives, effectively destroyed, condemned
> to the utter hell of suffering from severe neuropsych symptoms due to
> massive barriers in obtaining diagnosis and treatment erected by the
> propaganda campaign, probably numbers at this point in the tens if not
> hundreds of thousands and will only increase as time goes
> on...remember, neurosyphilis usually lays dormant or incubates for
> 10-15 years..and the lyme spirochete has been shown to do the
> same...what we are seeing now and in the next decade will be a dramatic
> increase in late neuroborreliosis initially contracted during the
> 1990's.
I see.
I honestly think you have some serious issues.
But, hell...don't let that stop you from posting here...here you fit
right in.
dali
>Brent...please edit your posts a little more carefully...look at the
>above.
>
>It says that I stated: and then there is a quote from some horrifically
>stupid crap that "mockingbird" wrote.
>
>I didn't write that garbage.
Yes I know. Don't always assume my post are against you.
I'm simply throwing out the notion that finacial motives may not be
the total driving force behind these lyme crimes.
LymeRayja
> LymeRayja wrote:
> >
> > FACT: The following leading Steere camp doctors and researchers are all
> > members of the elite Epidemic Intelligence Service founded by Cold War
> > biowarfaremen, or are otherwise military or biowarfare experts:
> >
> > Allen Steere, Alan Barbour, Mark Klempner, Ed McSweegan, Jorge Benach,
> > David Dennis, Captain Paul Mead.
> >
> > That's just a taste.
> > Lisa
>
Dirtman whines:
> Okay...first...it would be nice if you would provide links or something
> so we can confirm this assertion.
>
Certainly, Dirtwad. Though most of this has been posted before.
Steere in EIS - see Polly Murray's book "The Widening Circle"
Alan Barbour - see website of Univ of California re the new biowar lab
he RUNS:
http://www.ia.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=1327
Klempner - see mass media coverage re BU super biowar lab RUN by him
Benach - " STONY BROOK - Jorge Benach of the State University New
York at Stony Brook is the recipient of a $3,070,354 NIH grant to
research agents of bioterrorism." Source:
http://www.nystar.state.ny.us/nl/archives2004/longislandA08-04.htm
David Dennis - see PMID: 9531233 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Dirtwad, are you having trouble figuring out that **Captain** Paul Mead
is a member of the military? Perhaps if you go back to the same mule
and ask him to kick you, this time, in the **other** side of the head,
it might help?
BTW Mead, for the more normal folk here, is that dirty little larva
migrans from the CDC who was involved in the recent NY Times smear
againt Igenex lab.
As for McSweegan, you're not seriously telling me you dont believe he's
a biowarfare expert, are you?
> Second...ASSUMING thta is all true...what conclusion(s) do you think
> are appropriate?
>
Tell me, failed-lawyerman-turned -Steere camp whore, what conclusion do
YOU think is appropriate?
We'd love to hear.
Lisa
derdritt...@yahoo.com
LymeRayja wrote:
> > LymeRayja wrote:
> > Second...ASSUMING thta is all true...what conclusion(s) do you think
> > are appropriate?
LMAO!!
GOOD answer!
YOU are the one making the statement...I asked YOU waht conclusion you
think we should draw from this.
How about it? What's the point?
> >
>
> Tell me, failed-lawyerman-turned -Steere camp whore, what conclusion do
> YOU think is appropriate?
You know...you are really only hurting yourself with that kind of talk.
Fact is...you're just mentally unbalanced LIAR. You hurl accusations
that you can't possibly even support...let alone prove.
And the problem is...is that it repeatedly shows that you and your
MENTAL PATIENT pals are off the walls drooling morons who believe
simply what they want to believe and sit around imagining boogeyman
conspiracies to "get" Kathleen Dickson and make excuses for her
CRIMINAL behavior.
You're a bunch of loons.
So...time to put up or shut up.
You say I'm a "paid Steere Camp plant/whore"?
Then post my name and address. Right here...right now.
Surely if you know all about me...that little detail can't be too
difficult.
Otherwise...people will think you're a raving rabid dog idiot who
attacks very ill Lyme patients.
(Hint: you are).
LymeRayja
derdritt...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> YOU are the one making the statement...I asked YOU waht conclusion you
> think we should draw from this.
I have said my conclusion over and over and over again, including on
this newsgroup.
My conclusion:
The fact that a massively disproportionate number of the leading Steere
camp doctors and scientists are from the EIS, or other
military/biowarfare background, coupled with other supporting evidence,
indicates that Lyme disease is a **militarily sensitive** issue.
This is the main reason for the cover-up and denial of diagnosis and
treatment to the sick, the persecution of honest Lyme doctors, and all
the attendant human rights abuses that go with the whole situation.
Of course, the insurance industry, the influence of Glaxo SmithKline
and other vaccine and/or test-kit makers, property and tourism
interests etc, all of whom have a stake in the cover-up, are extremely
important too.
The latter category would encompass failed lawyermen -turned -Steere
camp whores such as yourself.
>
> You say I'm a "paid Steere Camp plant/whore"?
>
> Then post my name and address. Right here...right now.
You say you're a real lawyer? Well, prove it. Post your name so we can
verify that with the Bar Association. I suspect you never even managed
to pass your exam.
You're a wannabe lawyer who never made the grade, forced to survive by
using your one and only talent- as a spin-doctor and liar - to whore
for the Steere camp instead.
Lisa
derdritt...@yahoo.com
LymeRayja wrote:
> derdritt...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >
> > YOU are the one making the statement...I asked YOU waht conclusion you
> > think we should draw from this.
>
> I have said my conclusion over and over and over again, including on
> this newsgroup.
Exactly. Your "conclusion"...an inference, a deduction...NOT a "fact".
Something you and others do seem to forget, occasionally.(Well, all the
time, really, but who's counting)?
>
> My conclusion:
>
> The fact that a massively disproportionate number of the leading Steere
> camp doctors and scientists are from the EIS, or other
> military/biowarfare background, coupled with other supporting evidence,
> indicates that Lyme disease is a **militarily sensitive** issue.
Well, whether a number is "massively disproportionate" or not is also a
conclusion...and is probably infuenced by perspective.
My GUESS...my speculation, is that if you bothered to total the sum of
all those who regualarly research aspects of Lyme disease, those with
non-military backgrounds would probably outweigh those with.
But again, even assuming that this is true...the question becomes,
well, what, if anything does that tell you? It may not say anything
whatever about the nature of the disease and its alleged military
signifigance...but simply that military types know the ins and outs of
government far better than their civilian counterparts and understand
the bureaucracy of grant applications and interconnections of
government.
I wonder if any "emerging disease" has ever been so heavily impacted by
the US government. Whether any disease has become presented to the
medical profession through the government as this one has. I will not
deny that there is room for question. But question does not equal FACT.
You cannot just assume your worst suspicions and fears and assert them
as being true.
I would go so far to say that the circumstantial evidence surrounding
the Plum Island story raises some questions that should be addressed.
But until you get those questions raised and answered, there just isn't
enough evidence to draw definite conclusions. That's my opinion.
>
> This is the main reason for the cover-up and denial of diagnosis and
> treatment to the sick, the persecution of honest Lyme doctors, and all
> the attendant human rights abuses that go with the whole situation.
Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
rapidly...problem.
And...they just might believe what they say is true.
Is this true? Hell, I certainly don't know. But I do know that you are
supposed to START with the SANE least far-fetched palusible explanation
and go from there. I just have never seen ANY evidence of ANYTHING that
even comes close to the definition of any criminal act of any kind...or
any idiotic "conspiracy", or "coverup".
>
> Of course, the insurance industry, the influence of Glaxo SmithKline
> and other vaccine and/or test-kit makers, property and tourism
> interests etc, all of whom have a stake in the cover-up, are extremely
> important too.
Speculation. People like GSK do, however, profit from disease. It's a
fact.
In a sense, so does every "LLMD". And patents...patents are routinely
pulled anymore on any innovation in the bio-scientific research world.
This does not indicate an intent to "profit" so much as it indicates an
intent to protect potential revenue from exploitation by others.
> The latter category would encompass failed lawyermen -turned -Steere
> camp whores such as yourself.
(Yawn).
>
> >
> > You say I'm a "paid Steere Camp plant/whore"?
> >
> > Then post my name and address. Right here...right now.
>
>
> You say you're a real lawyer? Well, prove it. Post your name so we can
> verify that with the Bar Association. I suspect you never even managed
> to pass your exam.
I don't care what you think, really. And if you think you are somehow
going to con me into revealing that information by insulting me, think
again, small childlike thought challenged cretin. It's none of your
damned business. (And...you don't verify that through the "Bar
Association", BTW).
No...you have said, many, many times that I am a "Steere Camp" "paid
plant". That means the burden of proof is on you to prove those claims.
You can't do it because you made it up...and I am a struggling Lyme
patient who gets sometimes tired of reading it. I had an awful day
yesterday.
And WHY do I deserve this? Apparently, because I disagreed with
Kathleen and told her she didn't have a basis for a RICO action. And I
was right then, and I am right, now. If you are going to brand everyone
who disagrees with your little collection of mental patients,
Nazi-sympathizers and halfwits as a "Steere Camp" agents...then the
vast, sane majority of the world are, in fact, "Steere Camp" agents.
And you lie. What you do NOT seem to realize is that when you make
claims like this that obviously cannot be substantiated, you reveal
your thought processes to be "troubled". You also reveal yourself to be
someone who knowingly attacks ill people for some twisted bizarre
reason...presumably because you are bereft of conscience and consider
yourself above considerations that apply to decent conduct among
civilized people.
Like more than a few of your friends, you hurl unsubstantiated and ugly
charges at anything that moves in the hope that something, anything,
sticks. You just make things up out of whole cloth...simply because
they disagree with you.
You are sad. Ugly. Small. Pathetic.
You are grossly irresponsible.
>
> You're a wannabe lawyer who never made the grade, forced to survive by
> using your one and only talent- as a spin-doctor and liar - to whore
> for the Steere camp instead.
It doesn't matter, Lisa, darling, whether I am a lawyer or not, my
sweet.
What matters is only whether what I say and have said is correct or
not...
...and we will all soon receive a lesson in this, courtesy of the
litigation Kathleen has filed.
It's already over, my dove. All the cards have been dealt.
As they say, "read 'em and weep".
dali
>
>Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
>growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
>is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
>Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
>severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
>antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
>disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
>together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
>rapidly...problem.
>
>And...they just might believe what they say is true.
>
That would have to be one heckuva coverup.
>Is this true? Hell, I certainly don't know. But I do know that you are
>supposed to START with the SANE least far-fetched palusible explanation
>and go from there. I just have never seen ANY evidence of ANYTHING that
>even comes close to the definition of any criminal act of any kind...or
>any idiotic "conspiracy", or "coverup".
are you sure?
kathleen
marika
>
>
> My GUESS...my speculation, is that if you bothered to total the sum of
> all those who regualarly research aspects of Lyme disease, those with
> non-military backgrounds would probably outweigh those with.
both my parents have been diagnosed.
I'm going to write a book called: "Don't be afraid of LYME... it's just
a harmless green citrus fruit."
>
> But again, even assuming that this is true...the question becomes,
> well, what, if anything does that tell you?
And by the way, I would lkie anyone who can explain adequately to me
how a vaccine (which only works for viruses) is supposed to be
effective against a bacteria/spirochete.
mk5000
"How does your heart believe
What is it like to live and reach for
Something you cannot see?
I run in circles searching"--christine and scott dente, perfect circle
mockingbird
>even comes close to the definition of any criminal act of any kind...or
>any idiotic "conspiracy", or "coverup". >>>>>
That's because you are blind.
dali
I think he gets it fairly well. Whether he posted this on purpose or in
his zeal to rip Lymerayja it slipped, I don't know, but I do agree with
him.
>Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
>growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
>is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
>Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
>severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
>antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
>disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
>together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
>rapidly...problem.
>And...they just might believe what they say is true.
imo it is without a doubt true. (now playing devils advocate)
Any attempt to beat borrelia with traditional abx in the longterm is
hopeless. Why bankrupt America (or any other country) on something you
cannot possibly win? It's nasty politics but it's a nasty disease.
Martijn
> Why bankrupt America (or any other country) on something you
> cannot possibly win? It's nasty politics but it's a nasty disease.
There are several conditions you cannot "beat", but which can be
treated. But sure, why not, let's stop helping any people at all, it
only consumes energy, time and money. Have a nice day.
dali
By devil advocate I meant be on your side. These are the views of your
favorite posters such as aweisman etc. Have a good one yourself.
Martijn
> By devil advocate I meant be on your side. These are the views of your
> favorite posters such as aweisman etc.
That is not true.
dali
Yep, it is. aweisman was not an idiot (well on medicine at least). He,
in his own words, admitted to the hopelessness of the situation and
stated something to the affect of "we would be better off if we did
nothing."
It's a good argument.
In the big picture traditional abx are not the answer. Not even close.
Martijn
> Yep, it is. aweisman was not an idiot (well on medicine at least).
Not on medicine either.
> He,
> in his own words, admitted to the hopelessness of the situation and
> stated something to the affect of "we would be better off if we did
> nothing."
Where did he say that?
> It's a good argument.
> In the big picture traditional abx are not the answer. Not even close.
Silver isn't the answer at all.
dali
Sure it is.
These folks who implemented this "policy" on borrelia are DAMN lucky
this is a good news/bad news situation.
Silver is already medical fact Martijn. get used to it.
LymeRayja
> >
> > The fact that a massively disproportionate number of the leading Steere
> > camp doctors and scientists are from the EIS, or other
> > military/biowarfare background, coupled with other supporting evidence,
> > indicates that Lyme disease is a **militarily sensitive** issue.
>
> Well, whether a number is "massively disproportionate" or not is also a
> conclusion...and is probably infuenced by perspective.
>
> My GUESS...my speculation, is that if you bothered to total the sum of
> all those who regualarly research aspects of Lyme disease, those with
> non-military backgrounds would probably outweigh those with.
We are not talking about the total sum of those who regularly research
aspects of Lyme disease. We are talking about the Steere camp.
When I said a massively disproportionate number of them are from a
military/biowarfare background, I was talking about **leading**
Steerite researchers and officials, those who have **made** policy on
Lyme diagnosis and treatment.
Of course not every single one of them is a biowarfareman. But the
shortfall tends to be made up by insurance whores, people involved in
ownership of test-kit companies, people paid by GSK etc..
>
> But again, even assuming that this is true...the question becomes,
> well, what, if anything does that tell you? It may not say anything
> whatever about the nature of the disease and its alleged military
> signifigance...but simply that military types know the ins and outs of
> government far better than their civilian counterparts and understand
> the bureaucracy of grant applications and interconnections of
> government.
Oh come on, Dirtman. You can do better than that. You're in danger of
losing your job as a paid Steere camp plant with ineffective arguments
like that.
>
> I wonder if any "emerging disease" has ever been so heavily impacted by
> the US government. Whether any disease has become presented to the
> medical profession through the government as this one has.
Why wonder? Just call Ed, Phil Baker, or David Dennis and ask them.
I will not
> deny that there is room for question. But question does not equal FACT.
> You cannot just assume your worst suspicions and fears and assert them
> as being true.
The UK government says there is no Lyme research going on here in
Britain, and that there has not been any for some years. However, a
delegation from Porton Down (Britain's top chem and biowar facility),
at an international gathering on the subject of biodefense, described
all the marvellous work they are doing on Lyme disease (as well as many
other tick-borne infections). Why doyou think that is?
BTW, This document is in the public domain and has been posted here
before, before you mouth off.
>
> I would go so far to say that the circumstantial evidence surrounding
> the Plum Island story raises some questions that should be addressed.
> But until you get those questions raised and answered, there just isn't
> enough evidence to draw definite conclusions. That's my opinion.
Seeing as you are a paid Steere camp plant whose only raison d'etre
appears to be to sit up here and attack anyone who accuses the Steere
camp of corruption, who gives a monkey's anus what you think?
> >
> > This is the main reason for the cover-up and denial of diagnosis and
> > treatment to the sick, the persecution of honest Lyme doctors, and all
> > the attendant human rights abuses that go with the whole situation.
>
> Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
> growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
> is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
> Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
> severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
> antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
> disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
> together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
> rapidly...problem.
Dirt, that's not what's going on, and you know it. But just look at
what you wrote. Even if it was true, what would it constitute? A
**cover-up**.
>
> And...they just might believe what they say is true.
Doublethink. If they are deliberately downplaying the severity of a
disease, that's a conscious falsification. So how can they "believe
what they say is true"?
>
> Is this true? Hell, I certainly don't know. But I do know that you are
> supposed to START with the SANE least far-fetched palusible explanation
> and go from there.
Yes. When a group of scientists, doctors and govt officials ar
consistently lying, distorting and inventing facts to the detriment of
the millions of Lyme sufferers around the world, and when a massively
disproportionate number of them are from a military/biowarfare
background, and/or have direct conflicts of interest with the
insurance, vaccine, test-kit or other industries, the sane conclusion
is that this is no mere co-incidence.
When Pat Smith visited an army base some years ago the military wer
ekeen to show her the new helmets that had been developed, with a live
up-to-the-minute data feed which the soldier could read on the visor.
The data feed was linked to a satellite database containing information
on borrelia burgdorferi infection rates of ticks all over the world.
There were also portable PCR kits for unit commanders to do instant
analysis on bitten soldiers' blood; the results would be fed, via the
high-speed satellite link back into the central database. In this way,
a soldier could hope to have some information about the tick
infectivity rates on any patch of ground he stepped on. Would the army
do all this for a disease that's trivial,hard-to-catch, and eaily cured
with a few weeks abx? Are you out of your mind?
> > Of course, the insurance industry, the influence of Glaxo SmithKline
> > and other vaccine and/or test-kit makers, property and tourism
> > interests etc, all of whom have a stake in the cover-up, are extremely
> > important too.
>
> Speculation. People like GSK do, however, profit from disease. It's a
> fact.
>
Do you think a soul out there believes you that it's all just
"speculation"? Do you think a single, genuine Lyme patient out there
actually believes that the insurance industry has not influenced the
way things are?
You're pathetic.
> In a sense, so does every "LLMD".
Nonsense. The amount of hassle and trouble an LLMD risks, including but
not limited to anonymous false accusations that can bankrupt him or
even lose him his license - do you think that this is the road a doctor
would take to make money?
You would compare the revenue of an LLMD to the revenue of an insurance
company if its policy-holders with Lyme disease are denied treatment?
Are you out of your mind?
And patents...patents are routinely
> pulled anymore on any innovation in the bio-scientific research world.
> This does not indicate an intent to "profit" so much as it indicates an
> intent to protect potential revenue from exploitation by others.
Gobbledygook and spin. Now you are making me believe you do have a
future as a lawyer after all.
A patent is for making sure you can make money out of something, and
for forcing others to pay you if they want to use your idea/invention.
Stop muddying the waters.
>
> > The latter category would encompass failed lawyermen -turned -Steere
> > camp whores such as yourself.
>
> (Yawn).
> >
Well, if you didnt spend so much time sleeping with our enemies, maybe
you wouldnt be so tired.
> And WHY do I deserve this? Apparently, because I disagreed with
> Kathleen and told her she didn't have a basis for a RICO action.
Disagreed with Kathleen? You havent disagreed with her. You have
written **hundreds and hundreds ** - literally - of internet messages
condemning her, hurling maniacal abuse at her, libel of all kinds, and
nearly the same amount at me. Your "contributions" to the internet have
consisted of virtually nothing else. If anyone doubts this, they have
only to google and find out the truth.
You're OBSESSED.... you're pathological.
>
> What matters is only whether what I say and have said is correct or
> not...
>
> ...and we will all soon receive a lesson in this, courtesy of the
> litigation Kathleen has filed.
>
> It's already over, my dove. All the cards have been dealt.
>
Oh really? Care to explain?
Or are you, like Chuck, a bit behind with the "intel"?
Lisa
derdritt...@yahoo.com
LymeRayja wrote:
> > Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
> > growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
> > is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
> > Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
> > severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
> > antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
> > disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
> > together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
> > rapidly...problem.
>
> Dirt, that's not what's going on, and you know it. But just look at
> what you wrote. Even if it was true, what would it constitute? A
> **cover-up**.
???? Huh?
>
> >
> > And...they just might believe what they say is true.
>
> Doublethink. If they are deliberately downplaying the severity of a
> disease, that's a conscious falsification. So how can they "believe
> what they say is true"?
People have a remarkable ability to believe what they want to believe.
People will adopt the conclusions...find the results that they
want...that they're looking to find. This is what makes cases involving
"intent" so difficult to prove.
Some people are not CONSCIOUS deceivers. When confronted with an
unacceptable version of objective truth...they simply "massage" the
conflicting information into a version of the truth that they can deal
with. Then they spit out the "massaged" version...completely unaware,
themselves, that they have, in fact, "edited" the truth.
Know anyone like that?
> > Is this true? Hell, I certainly don't know. But I do know that you are
> > supposed to START with the SANE least far-fetched palusible explanation
> > and go from there.
>
> Yes. When a group of scientists, doctors and govt officials ar
> consistently lying, distorting and inventing facts to the detriment of
> the millions of Lyme sufferers around the world, and when a massively
> disproportionate number of them are from a military/biowarfare
> background, and/or have direct conflicts of interest with the
> insurance, vaccine, test-kit or other industries, the sane conclusion
> is that this is no mere co-incidence.
Yes, well, "the sane conclusion" is...that you are not.
Those statements are conclusions that you have somehow managed to
reach.(Please don't try to tell me how).
>
> When Pat Smith visited an army base some years ago the military wer
> ekeen to show her the new helmets that had been developed, with a live
> up-to-the-minute data feed which the soldier could read on the visor.
> The data feed was linked to a satellite database containing information
> on borrelia burgdorferi infection rates of ticks all over the world.
> There were also portable PCR kits for unit commanders to do instant
> analysis on bitten soldiers' blood; the results would be fed, via the
> high-speed satellite link back into the central database.
WHAT?
ROFLMAO!!!
Now I've heard it all.
(Pat Smith is actually an alien being from a planet hidden behind a
star in the constellation Orion, by the way). (Sshhhh. Don't tell).
In this way,
> a soldier could hope to have some information about the tick
> infectivity rates on any patch of ground he stepped on. Would the army
> do all this for a disease that's trivial,hard-to-catch, and eaily cured
> with a few weeks abx? Are you out of your mind?
No...but YOU...uhhh...wow!!!
>
>
> > And WHY do I deserve this? Apparently, because I disagreed with
> > Kathleen and told her she didn't have a basis for a RICO action.
>
> Disagreed with Kathleen? You havent disagreed with her. You have
> written **hundreds and hundreds ** - literally - of internet messages
> condemning her, hurling maniacal abuse at her, libel of all kinds, and
> nearly the same amount at me. Your "contributions" to the internet have
> consisted of virtually nothing else. If anyone doubts this, they have
> only to google and find out the truth.
> You're OBSESSED.... you're pathological.
Yeah. For once you're right. As I have said many, many times now...just
go back in the archives here and see what happened when I tried to tell
her she didn't have a RICO action.
All of a sudden...attack of the rabid Chihuahua. (that's you, my pet).
That's all the two of you do when you are confronted with a question
you can't answer...attack and insult. Yip,yip, yap.
> > What matters is only whether what I say and have said is correct or
> > not...
> >
> > ...and we will all soon receive a lesson in this, courtesy of the
> > litigation Kathleen has filed.
> >
> > It's already over, my dove. All the cards have been dealt.
> >
>
> Oh really? Care to explain?
> Or are you, like Chuck, a bit behind with the "intel"?
LMAO!!!
It's freaking D-O-O-M-E-D.(or maybe, D-U-M-B-E-D).
I've NEVER seen such a pile of crap...even from a "pro se". She has NO
clue. As I have told her a number of times, she could have at least
gotten hold of examples of how to draft these documents.
There ARE rules about these things, you know...and even though judges
allow "pro se" plaintiffs more slack than lawyers, usually...her crap
is soooo bad, you can't even make out what her claim is...what her
cause of action is. It's absolutely horrible, schizoid garbage.
And she better become a real quick expert on the rules of
evidence...LOL. You do realize, don't you, that she has to PROVE all
these lunatic allegations.
And it isn't like she wasn't told...many, many times. She just doesn't
listen.
dali
derdritt...@yahoo.com
What in the f--k is this supposed to mean, Brent?
If you have something you'd like to say...say it. Are we supposed to
guess?
dali
I think it was a very easy to understand question.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
dali wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2005 17:06:39 -0700, derdritt...@yahoo.com stated:
>
> >
> >dali wrote:
> >> On 5 Oct 2005 14:54:22 -0700, derdritt...@yahoo.com stated:
> >>
> >> >> Dirt, that's not what's going on, and you know it. But just look at
> >> >> what you wrote. Even if it was true, what would it constitute? A
> >> >> **cover-up**.
> >> >
> >> >???? Huh?
> >
> >What in the f--k is this supposed to mean, Brent?
> >
> >If you have something you'd like to say...say it. Are we supposed to
> >guess?
>
> I think it was a very easy to understand question.
WHAT IS?
All that appears at sci.med. diseases.lyme is a part of quoted
text...Lisa wrote some inane dribble and I asked her "huh"?...and now
you quote that back to me...and assume it's supposed to make sense?
THERE ISN'T ANY DAMN QUESTION, BRENT.
LymeRayja
derdritt...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Some people are not CONSCIOUS deceivers. When confronted with an
> unacceptable version of objective truth...they simply "massage" the
> conflicting information into a version of the truth that they can deal
> with. Then they spit out the "massaged" version...completely unaware,
> themselves, that they have, in fact, "edited" the truth.
Dirt, you can advise your evil friends to use that in your defense, but
no, like Weisman's underwear when he sees what's coming a few months
from now - it won't wash.
You're trying to convince the Lyme community that the Steere camp lie
while being totally unaware they are lying, so absorbed are they in
believing their own lies?
Nonsense.
You want us to delve deep into the subconscious of Allen Steere, where
you believe that, for example, he has mentally blocked out any
consciousness of the "persistence" and "formationa of a new IgM
response" late in Lyme, because he is so, genuinely, convinced that it
doesn't happen? And so much does he want to deny the reality of IgM
reactivity in late Lyme, that he has completely forgotten that he
studied it and published on it years ago?
Get a life.
> >
> > Yes. When a group of scientists, doctors and govt officials ar
> > consistently lying, distorting and inventing facts to the detriment of
> > the millions of Lyme sufferers around the world, and when a massively
> > disproportionate number of them are from a military/biowarfare
> > background, and/or have direct conflicts of interest with the
> > insurance, vaccine, test-kit or other industries, the sane conclusion
> > is that this is no mere co-incidence.
>
> Yes, well, "the sane conclusion" is...that you are not.
Weak, pathetic, childish, Dirt.
> >
> > When Pat Smith visited an army base some years ago the military wer
> > ekeen to show her the new helmets that had been developed, with a live
> > up-to-the-minute data feed which the soldier could read on the visor.
> > The data feed was linked to a satellite database containing information
> > on borrelia burgdorferi infection rates of ticks all over the world.
> > There were also portable PCR kits for unit commanders to do instant
> > analysis on bitten soldiers' blood; the results would be fed, via the
> > high-speed satellite link back into the central database.
>
> WHAT?
>
> ROFLMAO!!!
>
> Now I've heard it all.
>
> (Pat Smith is actually an alien being from a planet hidden behind a
> star in the constellation Orion, by the way). (Sshhhh. Don't tell).
You are making a **major** fool of yourself, Dirt. This information has
been out in the public domain for years. Pat Smith visited the Aberdeen
"Proving" Grounds (love the names they gave to biowar testing
facilities) and afterwards said this:
"Unlike other diseases, a discussion of Lyme is often not medical but
political. The political climate dictates what the disease is, who can
treat it, how it can be treated, and who gets treatment. Lyme is the
most prevalent vector-borne disease in the U.S. and the most prevalent
vector-borne bacterial disease in the world, yet is rarely given the
weight it deserves. Patients frequently cannot obtain diagnosis,
treatment, insurance reimbursement, disability, education or even
understanding from their families and peers because treating physicians
throughout the country have faced a variety of licensure sanctions
including being supervised, fined, not allowed to treat Lyme patients,
and license suspension and revocation.
This pattern of patient and physician problems appears to be an anomaly
when considered in light of activates at the federal level. Visiting
the US Army Centers for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine
(CHPPM) at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, the LDA was surprised at its
aggressive program, which includes impregnating army uniforms at the
time of manufacture with permethrin for troops going into tick infested
areas. CHPPM developed a pocket-sized lab to test ticks in the field
so that soldiers may receive immediate treatment if bitten by ticks
that test Lyme positive. Babesiosis and Ehrlichiosis are also being
studied. Tick populations are mapped with resultant data stored in GPS
satellites. This data will soon be beamed to soldiers in the field
wearing special prototype helmets containing heads-up displays, which
will show the soldiers where the heaviest tick concentrations and
highest tick infectivity rates are, allowing armies to maneuver around
them."
And before you come out with more false accusations, the text is
available on the LDA website at:
www.lymediseaseassociation.org/EICSconference.doc
Pat Smith has done the Lyme community a great service in finding out
the above facts; however, where I would disagree with her is that the
Aberdeen news does not constitute an "anomaly", compared to the neglect
of patients and persecution of LLMDs, but rather, is a great clue to
**explaining why it's going on**.
Do the heads of the US and allied NATO countries' military, who know
the true significance of this disease better than anyone else in the
world, want to risk their key personnel, senior officers, or whole army
units etc falling victim to it?
Hell no.
Hence the PCR kits, the instantaneous satellite link, the tick
infection rates beamed direct to the soldier's helmet, etc etc.
You see, Dirt, while your paymasters may continue to tell the world
that Lyme is like the common cold, only more easily curable, these guys
are taking no chances.
>
> That's all the two of you do when you are confronted with a question
> you can't answer...attack and insult. Yip,yip, yap.
That's a pretty accurate description of your behaviour, Dirt, as well
as that of your accomplices, EvilChuck and Barbie-Doll (Weisman).
> There ARE rules about these things, you know...and even though judges
> allow "pro se" plaintiffs more slack than lawyers, usually...her crap
> is soooo bad, you can't even make out what her claim is...what her
> cause of action is. It's absolutely horrible, schizoid garbage.
Kathleen is autistic, as you know well, having been told a million
times. She is also suffering from severe neuro-Lyme, and the trauma of
having had her children removed on false charges (in which your
Steerite friends were **deeply** involved). It's not a wonder that her
ability to communicate her ideas is damaged. What's a wonder is how she
has managed to survive through all that, and still retain the ability
to ferret out the means by which your Steere camp friends have
falsified Lyme science.
Yes, Dirt, you and your 2 pals can continue to scream at her, harass
her, try and get her jailed, call her insane. You must be proud of
yourself, taunting an autistic woman for her inability to communicate
her knowledge clearly. After all, as someone who has jeered at a little
girl in a wheelchair,rejoiced when innocent women had their children
taken off them, jumped to the defense of a man who made fun of a woman
whose baby died of Lyme, continually taunted people with proven
neuroborreliosis, it's all in a day's work for you.
But tell me, Dirt, did you ever consider....
What if someone **without** autism, **not suffering** from severe
neuro-Lyme, **not** traumatised by the removal of their children, was
to take Kathleen's scientific data, and take her work forward?
And what if two such people worked together?
Or three?
Or ten?
Or a hundred?
What if some were scientifically or medically qualified themselves?
what if the data was coupled with information about the military
attitude to Lyme (eg in the Aberdeen piece I quoted above), and about
the backgrounds of your friends?
And what if the whole dirty business was then made public via the
media?
You used the word "doomed", Dirt. I would agree with that. But it's not
the Lyme patient communtiy that's doomed.
Let me remind you - and others here, who may not know - Professor Roy
Meadow, the inventor of "Munchausens by proxy", was an extremely
eminent paediatrician here for over 25 years, was the first head of the
Royal College of Paediatrics, was knighted ("Sir Roy Meadow") and had
all kinds of other honours bestowed on him. And you know, when he was
hauled up before the tribunal this year, he actually did try the type
of defense you described earlier - that he "meant well", that when he
sent innocnet women, already traumatised by the death of their babies,
to jail for life on falsified evidence, he argued, that he really and
genuinely believed they were guilty.
And you know, Dirt, that argument didnt help him. Even his extremely
powerful friends at the top of the UK medical establishment, who spoke
out vigorously in his support, and the pleading of the present head of
the Royal College that the General Medical Council should view his
"mistakes" as just blips in an otherwise brilliant career - none of
this could save him.
And do you know why, Dirt?
Because **the public had found out the truth**.
Understand?
Now tell your pimps, you Steere camp whore.
Lisa
dali
If you look you will find a question mark. These are little doohickies
that people put at the end of a sentence to imply that a question is
being asked.
and yes lymerayja he really does believe what he wrote and so do many
other very good llmd's.
http://www.canlyme.com/pandora.html
derdritt...@yahoo.com
dali wrote:
>
> If you look you will find a question mark. These are little doohickies
> that people put at the end of a sentence to imply that a question is
> being asked.
>
> and yes lymerayja he really does believe what he wrote and so do many
> other very good llmd's.
> http://www.canlyme.com/pandora.html
Well, yes, Brent...I KNOW there is a question mark there...because I
put it there.
See that "HUH"??? I wrote that in response to Lisa.
Now WHAT do you mean by quoting it back to me?
Damn, boy.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
LymeRayja wrote:
> derdritt...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> > Some people are not CONSCIOUS deceivers. When confronted with an
> > unacceptable version of objective truth...they simply "massage" the
> > conflicting information into a version of the truth that they can deal
> > with. Then they spit out the "massaged" version...completely unaware,
> > themselves, that they have, in fact, "edited" the truth.
>
>
> while being totally unaware they are lying, so absorbed are they in
> believing their own lies?
No. Not necessarily. I don't think I was saying that, at all, actually.
I was really talking about people in general. You might have noticed
that I asked YOU if you "knew anyone like that"...that can't tell the
difference between the truth and the lies she has made up to cover the
truth that she can no longer bear to confront.
For the record, though...as an illustration, only...my personal feeling
is that Klempner probably did NOT set out to deliberately prove that
"longterm" antibiotic therapy was ineffective.
BUT...I think since he so deeply believed this to be true before
starting...his own beliefs influenced his findings and conclusions.
Bias. This is what I mean by "people believing what they want to
believe". In the end, it makes little substantive difference...but you
cannot get into someone's head in a court of law in that situation and
PROVE that it was done intentionally and deliberately...and that's what
he set out to do...absent some "smoking gun" paper trail.
Others here..."believe what they want to believe" about Klempner with
little or no evidence to support their beliefs...other than they have a
compulsive need to BLAME someone for their misfortune.
You want to believe I am a "Steere Camp agent provocateur"...for God
only knows what reason...
...but I suspect you know the TRUTH...and THAT just shows what a
grotesque little filthy pig you really are...
...you sickening disgusting perverted twisted piece of...
...you knowingly attack desperately ill people just to make some STUPID
inane little gesture on a pathetically stupid message board.
You're a really sick little bitch. The ends do not justify the means.
You cannot denigrate and attack other patients in the hypocritical
posture of "helping" others.
You fraud. What a loser you are that you would stoop to this. For what?
This pathetic namecalling and shouting and ranting is now what you want
to make of you life?
God help you.
>
>
> > >
> > > When Pat Smith visited an army base some years ago the military wer
> > > ekeen to show her the new helmets that had been developed, with a live
> > > up-to-the-minute data feed which the soldier could read on the visor.
> > > The data feed was linked to a satellite database containing information
> > > on borrelia burgdorferi infection rates of ticks all over the world.
> > > There were also portable PCR kits for unit commanders to do instant
> > > analysis on bitten soldiers' blood; the results would be fed, via the
> > > high-speed satellite link back into the central database.
> >
> > WHAT?
> >
> > ROFLMAO!!!
> >
> > Now I've heard it all.
>
> You are making a **major** fool of yourself, Dirt.
No. If you bother to read what you said above...and compare it to what
is said below...
...you will no doubt notice that YOU say that this Buck Rogers headgear
currently exists and that Phat Smith checked it out...
...but she clearly says that it will only exist in the future. Sorry,
hon. Read your own ravings a little more closely. You clearly state
that this was a reality.
(I have a hat like that. I made it out of tinfoil like Kathleen's. It
not only tells me where ticks are...I get HBO, ESPN and the Weather
Channel, too).
This information has
> been out in the public domain for years. Pat Smith visited the Aberdeen
> "Proving" Grounds (love the names they gave to biowar testing
> facilities) and afterwards said this:
>
>
> "Tick populations are mapped with resultant data stored in GPS
> satellites. This data will soon be beamed to soldiers in the field
> wearing special prototype helmets containing heads-up displays, which
> will show the soldiers where the heaviest tick concentrations and
> highest tick infectivity rates are, allowing armies to maneuver around
> them."
Oh...see that? "This data will soon"...this means: "not yet", sometime
in the future...ain't happnin right now. And by the way...what a
complete LOAD OF CRAP.
You mean the technology exists to locate ticks from space?
GAWD. Phat Smith in the 22nd Century!!! LDA to the stars...and
BEYOND!!!
LMAO.
>
>
> > There ARE rules about these things, you know...and even though judges
> > allow "pro se" plaintiffs more slack than lawyers, usually...her crap
> > is soooo bad, you can't even make out what her claim is...what her
> > cause of action is. It's absolutely horrible, schizoid garbage.
>
> "Kathleen is autistic, as you know well, having been told a million
> times. She is also suffering from severe neuro-Lyme, and the trauma of
> having had her children removed on false charges (in which your
> Steerite friends were **deeply** involved). It's not a wonder that her
> ability to communicate her ideas is damaged. What's a wonder is how she
> has managed to survive through all that, and still retain the ability
> to ferret out the means by which your Steere camp friends have
> falsified Lyme science".
(I honest-to-God have NO idea what Kathleen's problem really is. Ain't
my department). She used to claim she was "schizoid".
But if she really is "autistic" and "permanently brain-infected"...then
maybe...just MAYBE...
...SHE DOESN"T BELONG IN F---ING FEDERAL COURT filing stupid damn piles
of insane drivel and calling it a "lawsuit"...and then claiming to the
entire world how she is valiantly fighting for US.
Autistic people with "permanent brain infections" probably shouldn't be
trying to sue most of the known world for (LOL) 100 MILLION dollars
(LOL, again)...especially if she has diificulty communicating her
"ideas".
DO YOU KNOW WHAT LAWYERS ARE?
See, we have people who will do this for her. Problem is: they told her
to forget it. No claim. No cause of action...too difficult to prove if
you did.
Problem is: she does NOT LISTEN. SHE decided they had NO "NADS".
If "autism" means you are an arrogant self-centered egomaniac...then
she's definitely "autistic".
dali
>Well, yes, Brent...I KNOW there is a question mark there...because I
>put it there.
>
>See that "HUH"??? I wrote that in response to Lisa.
>
>Now WHAT do you mean by quoting it back to me?
>
>Damn, boy.
are we putting this off? Here is the following text copied and pasted
from her writings.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
BRENT:
IN ENGLISH.
WHAT THE F--K ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY?
derdritt...@yahoo.com
dali wrote:
>
> are we putting this off? Here is the following text copied and pasted
> from her writings.
Are we putting WHAT off, Brent? What in the HELL are you talking about?
Look...Lisa asks a question...and then she answers it herself.
Then I say, "???huh?"--because I don't understand.
(She doesn't answer).
Then you quote the whole thing back to me...with no material you
added...
...what in the f--k are you talking about?
Are you out of your friggin' mind?
This isn't a 'trick' question...I'm just trying to figure out what you
are trying to say.
Do you often do this? Make a comment or ask a question and then refuse
to explain what you mean?
Nice. Real interesting.
dali
whatever, as you say, if she want to rephrase it so you can understand
it thats up to her.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
WHAT?
Brent...YOU STUPID DUMB BASTARD...IT WAS A "RHETORICAL" QUESTION, YOU
F---ING IDIOT.
SHE ANSWERED IT HERSELF YOU ADDLED BRAINED MORON.
WHAT ON EARTH IS WRONG WITH YOU?
You didn't read very carefully and you SCREWED UP.
But now you are wasting my time and space on the board because you are
apparently too big of a horse's ass to ADMIT you made a simple error.
What a goddamned jerkoff.
dali
your mental abilities are improving.
I'm simply saying it's a very easy to understand "RHETORICAL" question
and does not require a "???huh?". But thats just me.
lmao, just shut up why don't you
derdritt...@yahoo.com
You are such a limp tool.
Look at this, dickless:
Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
rapidly...problem.
And...they just might believe what they say is true.
That's what I said. No way in hell that suggests a "coverup" as the one
who missed her rabies and distemper shots suggests.
Then YOU come in here and repeat to me...as if I supposed to read your
tiny little mind and understand whatever it was that YOU didn't read
properly.
You're a pack of dumbass jackals howling at the moon.
Go play with someone your own size...some gradeschoolers, somewhere.
mockingbird
growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
rapidly...problem.
And...they just might believe what they say is true.
That's what I said. No way in hell that suggests a "coverup" as the one
who missed her rabies and distemper shots suggests. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
well, if "they" believe this to be the case, then why don't "they"
state so publicly? You say it's not a cover-up, but in fact if what you
print above is true (does everybody at the NIH believe this, or just
you???) then it is a coverup, because there is a huge discrepancy
between what "they" believe and what "they" tell the public, who in
fact pay "their" salaries.
There's no evidence that Bb develops abx resistance, there was one
article earlier this year, but that wasn't a standard abx...barbour and
other "prominent" scientists including david dennis have published on
this very fact, that Bb does not demonstrate this behavior. Are you
saying that "they" are lying?
If "they" believe the above scenario to be the case, then why don't
"they" advocate for measures that would effectively help limit/contain
the spread of lyme disease, eg culling deer in endemic areas, etc. ?
Clearly, either "they" do not believe lyme disease is a serious problem
as you describe above, or "they" are lying their asses off about the
disease, by which I mean to say that there are other means of acquiring
the disease outside of deer ticks. Yes, mice are important hosts, but
you cannot deny the importance of deer. Even if mice were the only wild
host, we could do much more to contain lyme disease vis a vis public
information, environmental alteration, and even such things as
maintenance of a large feral cat population. Any and all measures
should be considered if what you state above is what "they" believe.
And, by the way, you discern between "they" and us. This is the biggest
single problem that "they" have. "They" are not faced with an
infectious disease disaster..."we" are faced with the problem. The
hubris, arrogance, venality, and elitism displayed by "them" has
prevented any meaningful discussion of borrelia public or health policy
in an open forum...so that "we" are forcibly subjected to the terribly
corrupt and incompetent decisions made by "them", and the problem is
infinitely magnified by their inability to admit fault or weakness to
us or even among themselves.
the end result, already unavoidable, is a colossal scandal, horrific
tragedy, human wreckage strewn about and the condemnation of history
for the lunacy and malfeasance of "them".
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
>
> well, if "they" believe this to be the case, then why don't "they"
> state so publicly?
Uhhh..."they" have. Repeatedly. Over and over and over.
"You say it's not a cover-up",
NOOOO...that is NOT what I said.(There is a difference between
suggesting that there is not enough evidence to support or reach a
particular conclusion and denying the proposition in its entirety).
"...but in fact if what you
> print above is true (does everybody at the NIH believe this, or just
> you???) then it is a coverup, because there is a huge discrepancy
> between what "they" believe and what "they" tell the public, who in
> fact pay "their" salaries.
WHAT?
>
> There's no evidence that Bb develops abx resistance, there was one
> article earlier this year, but that wasn't a standard abx...barbour and
> other "prominent" scientists including david dennis have published on
> this very fact, that Bb does not demonstrate this behavior. Are you
> saying that "they" are lying?
That isn't the issue. The issue isn't whether Bb develops a specific
antimicrobial resistance or not...it may...but it would only be
confined to the host. Humans are deadend hosts (so far as we now know,
at least).
The issue is general antimicrobial resistance. If you are taking loads
of antibiotics...whatever else is in there can develop a resistance. We
are talking about the overuse of antibiotics in general. And...it is a
SERIOUS problem. I, personally doubt that it should play a role in this
particular struggle. The incidence of Lyme just isn't that great. As I
understand it, the most notorious culprits for overuse of antibiotics
are actually physicians that over-prescribe their use for the
possibility of respiratory infections resulting from the common cold.
But the "Steerites"...McSweegan, too, if I remember right...are all big
on two issues as a philosophy: antimicrobial resistance and
"evidence-based" medicine.
If you understand, even vaguely, what these things are about...then I
think you have a very good idea of what drives the conservatism that
you see with this disease. Doesn't have anything whatever to do with
the "profit" motive...(any more than any other doctor).
The problem with the "evidence-based" approach is that it is being
applied to an emerging disease...that isn't adequately understood.
In that sense, the burden of proof is being held strictly against the
patient...and that is not the way medicine should be, in my opinion.
>
> If "they" believe the above scenario to be the case, then why don't
> "they" advocate for measures that would effectively help limit/contain
> the spread of lyme disease, eg culling deer in endemic areas, etc. ?
Uhhhh..."they" do. Certainly Kathleen counts the ALDF as part of
"them", and the ALDF has taken some initiatives in this regard, I
believe. (I know you're not supposed to go to their website...but I
won't tell).
> Clearly, either "they" do not believe lyme disease is a serious problem
> as you describe above, or "they" are lying their asses off about the
> disease, by which I mean to say that there are other means of acquiring
> the disease outside of deer ticks. Yes, mice are important hosts, but
> you cannot deny the importance of deer. Even if mice were the only wild
> host, we could do much more to contain lyme disease vis a vis public
> information, environmental alteration, and even such things as
> maintenance of a large feral cat population. Any and all measures
> should be considered if what you state above is what "they" believe.
Go look at the ALDF website.(I am NOT saying that I approve of
them...or believe any of these measures are or will be effective. I am
just saying to you that I think you will see exactly what you are
saying you don't think exists).
As far as lying their asses off about the seriousness of a
disease...well, my personal specualtion and suspicion is this is
exactly what the EIS trains its members to do, somewhat, in the face of
a growing health crisis.
Calm the public anxiety. It's what was done in the face of the anthrax
attacks.(By...whatshisname? He was head of the CDC then...EIS...one of
Steere's pals...can't remember...)? (Koplan)? Cost him his job, too.
justifiably so, in my opinion.
> And, by the way, you discern between "they" and us. This is the biggest
> single problem that "they" have. "They" are not faced with an
> infectious disease disaster..."we" are faced with the problem. The
> hubris, arrogance, venality, and elitism displayed by "them" has
> prevented any meaningful discussion of borrelia public or health policy
> in an open forum...so that "we" are forcibly subjected to the terribly
> corrupt and incompetent decisions made by "them", and the problem is
> infinitely magnified by their inability to admit fault or weakness to
> us or even among themselves.
Are you now admitting that I actually am one of "US"? LOL.
I've said this a hundred times at least...you have to understand that
being WRONG is not a criminal act or "fraud". If it were, most of the
people posting here would be locked up for a long, long time.
Steere, Klempner, et al may be incredibly arrogant, condescending
egomaniacal despotic autocratic neo-fascist medical control
freaks...and incredibly WRONG in their OPINIONS...
...but that simply does NOT make them "criminals"...even if...as
here...those OPINIONS, when in the hands of unskilled physicians, do a
great deal of damage to human lives.
Mine included.
>
> the end result, already unavoidable, is a colossal scandal, horrific
> tragedy, human wreckage strewn about and the condemnation of history
> for the lunacy and malfeasance of "them".
I can't disagree with that. I actually endorse THAT.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
> Another simple, plausible and straightforward alternative is the
> growing fear of antimicrobial resistance and the realization that there
> is no current effective method of stopping the growth and spread of
> Lyme disease. The possibility exists that "they" have downplayed the
> severity of the disease and attacked the utility of longterm
> antibiotics, because "they" are being faced with the spread of a
> disease that has no known end in sight. You think about the two things
> together...antibiotic resistant disease...whose spread is growing
> rapidly...problem.
> And...they just might believe what they say is true.
To clarify:
What I am trying to say there is that there is growing concern in the
medical community as a whole concerning the weakening of our collective
antibiotic arsenal in the fight against infectious disease of all
kinds, because of overuse and inappropriate use...but also, probably,
legitimate use, as well.
When I said that Lyme is antibiotic resistant...I mentioned this in
this context...meaning that more and more people will use more and more
antibiotics to treat a disease whose growth and spread is unchecked.
There's currently no end in sight to that growth. And so, no end in
sight to the projected increased use of antibiotics to treat that
disease.
And clearly this is causing stress to the longterm goal of preserving
what useful weapons the medical community does possess.
So, the point I was trying to make is that it is not inconceivable to
me that some may be guilty of "seeing what they want to see" when they
can't find evidence of survivabilty of the causative organism.
It's a convenient answer.
dali
Speaking of childish games...
I hope you two work this out.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
dali wrote:
> Speaking of childish games...
>
> I hope you two work this out.
BRENT:
Just shut the fuck up.
You apparently can't even read and make sense of what's being said
here.
Your "replies" don't even make sense.
Just shut up.
derdritt...@yahoo.com
mockingbird wrote:
> Go look at the ALDF website.(I am NOT saying that I approve of
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
> they advocate pollyanna half-measures, not real solutions.
>
> if you kill the deer, no need for the four poster crap...
Yes, well, I assume you realize that mass deer depopulation
(extermination) is NOT a viable or realistic solution.
>
> <<But the "Steerites"...McSweegan, too, if I remember right...are all
> big
> on two issues as a philosophy: antimicrobial resistance and
> "evidence-based" medicine.
>
> these are red herrings. especially in the case of "evidence-based"
> medicine. Pure propaganda, when the steerites know that what they have
> really been doing over the past 15 years is the reverse...science based
> on nothing at all. case in point, the klempner study which employed an
> unverified protocol. They criticize the LLMDS for using long term
> treatments which have not been validated by controlled studies, yet the
> main study they point to as evidence against this treatment philosophy
> used a horribly flawed protocol which itself has not been shown to be
> effective (and here I'm referring to doxy) against Bb s.s.
> neuroborreliosis. Rank hypocrisy. and then we have literally study
> after study from steere and others which contain massive contradictions
> and illogic, several of which I have already pointed out. How these
> people can continue to scream like ninnies during the day about the
> importance of EB medicine, and then sleep soundly at night, I do not
> know.
Yeah, and I really don't disagree with the thrust of what you say here,
either...(as I understand it).
But that is FAR different than "fraud" or "criminal" behavior.
AND...I am most definitely NOT denying that either "fraud" or
"criminal" acts occurred. They MAY have. I do NOT know.
What I AM saying is that those are SERIOUS charges which require strict
proof...and absent that proof, responsible people do NOT make
accusations like that.
But that is the reason, the lies, the goebbelesque propaganda,
> which is leading increasing numbers of them to employ bodyguards and
> bullet proof vests. Because they know what they are doing, and they
> know that thousands of people out there know what they are doing.
> Klempner lied left and right, and he had a high price...$100 million+.
> Anthony fauci needed this anthrax attack to increase his budget,
> otherwise he should never be able to pay off the bribes. I wonder
> what's next...probably someone in CDC or NIH is desperately trying to
> create a mutant airborne ebola or bird flu strain.
Well, I suspect that the reason that bulletproof vests are required, to
some extent, is due to the culture of insanity that permeates boards
like this...and assholes who don't think before posting crap like
"Steere is scheduled for termination"...or some equally foolish remarks
that were made concerning Klempner.
When you say that "Fauci" "lied"...this necessarily implies that what
he said was false (perhaps)...and that he KNEW it was false. While I
may be able, for the sake of argument, be able to concede falsity...I
have NO idea how you expect anyone to accept your contention that he
KNEW what he said was false.
You kin to Nostradamus or something?
Look...in my example about the anthrax thing...and Koplan's
misstatements about it...
...yeah, I think he deliberately misled the nation. But he might have
been doing so for what he considered valid and legitimate policy
reasons.
Personally, I strongly disagree with that approach, but it does exist
as a governmental response among some, yes. Can't disagree there.
But it is NOT enough to just assert these things occurred. You have to
PROVE that they KNEW.
dali
Then why do you reply? In fact when I post something just ignore it.
Can you handle that?
derdritt...@yahoo.com
Well, Brent, YOU asked me a question, remember? (Actually you
apparently THOUGHT you did...what you did was quote a RHETORICAL
question Lisa asked me).
And I, correctly, (it's what you're supposed to do when you don't
understand)...asked you what you meant.
And instead of just answering...you made up a series of rude remarks
and even LIED about what was said IN PRINT just two exchanges
previously.
Why do correspond with people if you can't jsut admit you made a simple
error and show complete disrespect for others the way you did here? And
this is NOT the first time, is it?
Remember when you asked me to e-mail the University of Northern Iowa? I
did...and then you DENIED haveing asked me to do it...even though the
message was right there in the archives.
You're not only a liar...you actually suck at it.
And you somehow think THAT is okay...and that I shouldn't be angry when
I am just trying to understand you?
dali
derdritt...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > Then why do you reply? In fact when I post something just ignore it.
> > Can you handle that?
>
>
> Well, Brent, YOU asked me a question, remember? (Actually you
> apparently THOUGHT you did...what you did was quote a RHETORICAL
> question Lisa asked me).
Yes, due to the fact you made some retarded ???HUH? remark.
Nobodies buying it.
>
> And I, correctly, (it's what you're supposed to do when you don't
> understand)...asked you what you meant.
>
> And instead of just answering...you made up a series of rude remarks
> and even LIED about what was said IN PRINT just two exchanges
> previously.
I answered, reread. oops it wasn't a question but a ... who the fuck
cares.
>
> Why do correspond with people if you can't jsut admit you made a simple
> error and show complete disrespect for others the way you did here? And
> this is NOT the first time, is it?
LMAO, If I could only show respect towards others like you do.
Saint dirtman, give me a break.
>
> Remember when you asked me to e-mail the University of Northern Iowa? I
> did...and then you DENIED haveing asked me to do it...even though the
> message was right there in the archives.
No, lawyers tend to spin things a certain way, so I asked for the
email.
Hell I'll ask for it again.(simple to do) Why? You are a liar and
cannot be trusted.
>
> You're not only a liar...you actually suck at it.
>
> And you somehow think THAT is okay...and that I shouldn't be angry when
> I am just trying to understand you?
???Huh?.