Corrections to Pat Smith Article in New London (CT)"The Day" newspaper

[Mort Zuckerman]

To: bpc...@norwichdiocese.net, scientifi...@ostp.gov,
pkru...@princeton.edu, Stanle...@fiu.edu,
emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com,
bob.d...@latimes.com

Subject: Corrections to Pat Smith Article in New London (CT)"The Day"
newspaper

Date: Jun 28, 2009 3:08 PM

ARTICLE BELOW / 2 CORRECTIONS:

-------------------------------------------

1) On Antibiotic Resistance:

Forcing the spirochete into the spheroplast
form is the resistant organism of which IDSA
complains (and you can verify this with
CDC officer Alan Barbour):
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=182019&blobtype=pdf

http://www.actionlyme.org/IDSA_CYST_VIABLE.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/BOGUS_RUSSIAN_NYMC_ARTICLES.htm

Burgdorfer on the viability of the spheroplast:
http://www.actionlyme.org/BURGDORFER_CYST.htm
"Although most of the above mentioned opponents of the "granulation
theory" verified the formation and existence of cysts, blebs,
spherules associated with spirochetes, they considered them as
degeneration products.

"Thus the question of "negative phase" and "complex developmental
cycle" appeared to be settled until in 1981 your speaker discovered
the Lyme disease spirochete -- now known as Borrelia burgdorferi --
associated with ticks of the Ixodes ricinus/persulcatus complex (Fig.
10). This relatively large Borrelia is not readily detectable in blood
smears or thick drops of Lyme disease patients and susceptible host
animals, ***yet engorgement on infected hosts results in up to 100%
infected ticks.***

^^^ There is your Swiss bioweaponeer who the USA
drafted and he "didn't tell you everything":
http://underourskin.com/blog/?p=191

Kapisch? You follow? He says things backhandedly.

Antibiotic use causes resistant L-forms, but only
in environments that have nothing to do with Lyme
victims and hospital-acquired L-forms. That is
IDSA's business and IDSA's problem and they haven't
even told us what OspA is yet, nor have they told us
why there are no HIV or tuberculosis vaccines.

Lyme victims never go to hospitals.

If we do, we get collected by the men in the
white coats and shipped off to the drug-dependency
wing of the State Funny Farm. Literally.

Go ahead and search for a structure of OspA online.

You will not find one single one of the ALDF/IDSA/Yale/
NYMC Lyme crooks talking about how OspA works or what it
does, yet at the molecular level STRUCTURE IS FUNCTION.

- - - - - - - - -

2) On the Motive of the ALDF.com/IDSA:

They committed RESEARCH FRAUD with the Dearborn testing:
http://www.actionlyme.org/CDC_DOCUMENTS_1990.htm
and ***they don't want to face homicide charges.***

That is the single reason they are keeping up the
charade. They are afraid of criminal charges.
The reason IDSA caved to AG Blumenthal on 4-30-2008
was because Yale's Eugene Shapiro was CAUGHT LYING
about CONGENITAL LYME in the movie, Under Our Skin:
http://www.actionlyme.org/MOMS_CAN_GIVE_LYME_TO_BABIES.htm

So, they're lying about a deadly disease, because
they made it deadlier by changing the diagnostic standard:
http://www.actionlyme.org/SV_PPT_2.htm

So, watch that presentation because it is only
50 slides and it is full of GRAPHICS, so that
you'll understand the science.

Science is all graphical and therefore not for
fairies like Eugene Shapiro or James Phillips.
It has nothing to do with personalities or stories
or who's-your-best-friend or if you're married someone
rich and famous. Science cares *nothing* for the
humans who are subject to it. (The fact that facts
just ARE, seems to be the biggest hurdle for me
because I'm surrounded by lying fairies, ie., the
entire State of Corrupticut.)

Scientific fraud? That's something prosecutable
and we don't need any new laws or bills. The RICO
and Qui Tam laws are already written.


***They don't want to face homicide charges*** over
the falsification of the testing standard at Dearborn
and for falsifying the outcomes of their OspA vaccines:
http://groups.google.com/group/scilyme2/browse_thread/thread/36e656b247b69fcd?hl=en#

And NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH PAT
SMITH. In fact, the reverse is true. Pat Smith
http://www.lymediseaseassociation.org
inhibits our progress deliberately.

Does Pat Smith EVER MENTION what happened at
Dearborn or the FDA rules for scientific validity?

Does she ever talk about SCIENTIFIC FRAUD?

No. That is because Pat Smith is not about
seeing the end of this, or else she would be
screaming for a federal - USDOJ - investigation.

And if she ever did, *then* what would happen?

Think....


Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
http://www.relapsingfever.org
==========================================================
http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=a46fde9f-dbf6-4b60-9b66-cc65b82742cc

Lyme Disease: Targeting The Wrong Offender In The Abuse Of Antibiotics
Published on 6/28/2009
Print this article. Print This Bookmark and Share E-mail link to
the article Send Correction

RELATED STORIES
History Of Lyme Disease 6/28/2009
Lyme Disease: Legislating Medical Treatment Is Seldom A Successful
Approach 6/28/2009

By Patricia V. Smith and Kim Pappa

There's a significant body of peer-reviewed science demonstrating
survival of the Lyme bacterium after short-term antibiotic treatment,
yet vested interests suppress that science and the data showing 15-20
percent or more of Lyme patients fail a short-treatment course.
Patients requiring re-treatment suffer from multi-systemic often
disabling symptoms. Continued treatment can keep many such patients
functioning and off of disability, thus reducing human suffering and
the financial burden for families and for the state.

This past week Gov. M. Jodi Rell signed into law a bill stating that
doctors have the right to prescribe long-term antibiotic treatment. We
strongly disagree with a recent Day editorial that had opposed her
signing of that law.

In its recent editorial The Day raised concerns that long-term
antibiotic treatments could generate drug resistance. The Lyme
bacterium is not drug resistant.

What The Day should be concerned about is research showing that much
drug resistance develops due to the vast usage of antibiotics by
factory farms. An estimated 50-70 percent of antibiotics in the United
States are used in animal food, not for disease, but to fatten
livestock and poultry, which annually produce 40 times more fecal
waste than humans. That manure is the route for infectious microbes
escaping into the environment. In June 2009 Johns Hopkins Magazine
reported the findings of a Hopkins researcher who estimated 89 percent
of bacteria in one manure area sampled were drug resistant.

In 2006, the European Union banned antibiotics from animal feed, yet
our government continues to sanction healthy animals being fed huge
amounts of antibiotics to get fat, while sick Lyme patients are denied
antibiotics to get well.

Supporters of the Lyme doctor protection law include respected medical
professionals: Connecticut Medical Society, American Academy of
American Physicians and Surgeons, and the International Lyme and
Associated Diseases Society (ILADS). The national Lyme Disease
Association and its 33 associated organizations nationwide support it.

Opposition comes from the Infectious Diseases Society of America
(IDSA), whose members' vested interests and exclusionary conduct in
Lyme guidelines' development were cited by Connecticut Attorney
General Blumenthal in legal action against IDSA.

The American Lyme Disease Foundation (ALDF), whose current president,
Phil Baker, formerly worked as the National Institutes of Health
program officer overseeing Lyme grants, can't be perceived as an
independent entity in assessing IDSA guidelines. The ALDF, in fact,
consists of many of the same individuals and researchers who developed
the IDSA guidelines.

Many medical conditions are treated long-term with antibiotics, for
example, acne is sometimes treated for years - only chronic Lyme is
singled out to deny its patients any treatment, except palliative
care. IDSA guidelines recommend against all antibiotic treatment for
chronic Lyme, against alternative treatments, against supplements, and
against doctor discretion in diagnosis - recommendations that seem
punitive, not medical in nature.

IDSA hasn't limited its opposition to this bill. It's also lobbied
against the federal bill for research monies and against having long-
term treating physicians on a Lyme federal advisory committee. IDSA
doesn't want patients to have a voice in their disease either, despite
the fact that other disease committees permit all stakeholders to
participate. IDSA views itself as the ultimate authority on a disease
they don't recognize or acknowledge.

They've written the “law” (guidelines) and use it to drive their
competitors out of business. The organization refuses to recognize any
legitimate scientific controversy or even mention their competitor's
guidelines - the ILADS guidelines, which suggest long-term treatment
when doctors determine it's necessary for patient health.

The Connecticut General Assembly and Gov. Rell understand the
injustices suffered by residents and treating physicians and
recognizes that a dichotomy exists in Connecticut - the state with the
highest per capita incidence of Lyme disease in the U.S. forcing its
residents to travel elsewhere for treatment. By passing this law they
took the only responsible course of action. They agreed with one voice
to end the injustices and rectify the dichotomy.

"Lyme-CT"

"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci