Loraine Johnson's response to CDC article
RSS Follow Become a Fan

Delivered by FeedBurner

Recent Posts

Natural Order
Abrupt Turns
A Journey of Mazes




May 2020
April 2020
February 2020
January 2020
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
January 2019
December 2018
July 2018
June 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
October 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
December 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013

powered by


Loraine Johnson's response to CDC article

In Response to the CDC's recent published article against the Lyme world From Loraine Johnson -

To All,  Lorraine Johnson posted their response. It was filed by Raphael B Stricker, MD. (see below).  Much appreciation is due to them,Jill ---- read bellow ----Last night Ray filed our pub-commons response to the Christina Nelson MMWR piece, detailing the previous ethics case.  This can now be cited. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28617768 Lorraine Johnson, Raphael B. Stricker, MD.Lymedisease.org, PO Box 1352, Chico, CA 95927; ILADS, PO Box 341461, Bethesda, MD 20827The article by Marzec et al. published in MMWR purports to show the dangers of treatment in patients diagnosed with chronic Lyme disease (1). Recent reports from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate that more than 300,000 new cases of Lyme disease are diagnosed each year in the USA (2). The MMWR article from the CDC describes five anecdotal cases of treatment complications in these patients while ignoring the significant morbidity related to denial of treatment for chronic Lyme disease (2,3). The resultant biased report raises scientific and ethical issues about the CDC's role in promoting the best care for patients with tickborne diseases.The MMWR piece resulted from anecdotal reports gathered by Dr. Christina Nelson of the CDC. The article notes that the information was gathered because “clinicians and state health departments periodically contact CDC concerning patients who have acquired serious bacterial infections during treatments for chronic Lyme disease.” However, an ethics complaint filed against Dr. Nelson by the Lyme disease patient advocacy group LymeDisease.org suggests that these adverse event reports were in fact specifically solicited by Dr. Nelson via emails distributed in 2014 (4). Dr. Nelson asked clinicians from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) to provide anecdotal evidence of harm to patients from intravenous antibiotic therapy related to Lyme disease, and she apparently offered coauthorship of her article as an incentive to describe these adverse events. She did not ask for consequences of failing to treat these patients, nor did she solicit commentary from practitioners who treat chronic Lyme disease according to the guidelines of the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS).The risk of any medical treatment is extremely context-sensitive. A crucial question is whether the risks of treatment are warranted given the potential benefits, the availability of other treatment options, the severity of the patient's presentation, and the risk tolerance of the individual patient. By asking for an assessment of treatment risks only, Dr. Nelson is framing the issue in a manner that excludes the other half of the equation in a risk/benefit assessment. She is also ignoring an issue that is critical to patients who suffer a profoundly diminished quality of life due to their illness, namely the risk of not treating (5,6). Moreover, by failing to mention that these adverse event reports were rare and specifically solicited, she implies that these rare occurrences are a common concern. In reality, studies of the risks and benefits associated with intravenous antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease indicate that the risks of adverse events are no greater than the risks of intravenous therapy in other unrelated diseases (7,8).By asking the question only of those on one side of the controversy, Dr. Nelson is further demonstrating favoritism and a lack of impartiality on the part of the CDC. Accordingly, Dr. Nelson's solicitation of anecdotal adverse events for case studies of Lyme disease is a highly inappropriate partisan act of favoritism toward the IDSA viewpoint at the expense of critical stakeholders - Lyme disease patients and their treating physicians - and an attack on the ILADS viewpoints. References 1. Marzec NS, Nelson C, Waldron PR, et al. Serious bacterial infections acquired during treatment of patients given a diagnosis of chronic Lyme disease - United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017 Jun 16;66(23):607-609. 2. Stricker RB, Johnson L. Lyme disease: Call for a ‘‘Manhattan Project’’ to combat the epidemic. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10(1): e1003796. 3. Stricker RB, Fesler MC. Chronic Lyme disease: A working case definition. Chronic Dis Int. 2017; 4(1): 1025. 4. Leland DK. TOUCHED BY LYME: CDC ignores ethics, attacks “chronic Lyme”. Available at https://www.lymedisease.org/touchedbylyme-cdc-ignores-ethics/. Accessed June 16, 2017. 5. Johnson L, Aylward A, Stricker RB. Healthcare access and burden of care for patients with Lyme disease: a large United States survey. Health Policy. 2011;102: 64–71. 6. Johnson L, Wilcox S, Mankoff J, Stricker RB. Severity of chronic Lyme disease compared to other chronic conditions: a quality of life survey. Peer J. 2014;2:e322. 7. Stricker RB, Green CL, Savely VR, Chamallas SN, Johnson L. Safety of intravenous antibiotic therapy in patients referred for treatment of neurologic Lyme disease. Minerva Med. 2010;101:1–7. 8. Stricker RB, Delong AK, Green CL, et al. Benefit of intravenous antibiotic therapy in patients referred for treatment of neurologic Lyme disease. Int J Gen Med. 2011; 4: 639–646.

9 Comments to Loraine Johnson's response to CDC article:

Comments RSS
emmy on Friday, June 29, 2018 5:20 AM
Reply to comment

Anonymous on Saturday, June 30, 2018 2:32 PM
Thanks for your comment.
Reply to comment

Milton Jensen on Thursday, November 29, 2018 2:39 AM
This is really great work. Thank you for sharing such a good and useful information here in the blog for everywhere. gangstar vegas mod apk zombie tsunami mod apk cooking fever mod apk
Reply to comment

Knee Injury and Arthritis Stem Cell Treatment on Tuesday, December 11, 2018 3:38 AM
This is really great information found here, I really like your blog. Thanks very much for the share. Keep posting.
Reply to comment

Pelvic Pain Frankfort on Tuesday, December 11, 2018 7:08 AM
What a fantastic publish! Other than the seriously helpful ideas, it really is just really ! Thanks a great deal in your strategies!!
Reply to comment

alternatives to knee surgery on Wednesday, December 12, 2018 3:53 AM
Great information, you have a wonderful blog and an excellent article.
Reply to comment

Headache Pain Frankfort on Wednesday, December 12, 2018 5:31 AM
Great site. I add this Post to my bookmarks.
Reply to comment

d on Monday, December 17, 2018 7:02 AM
Reply to comment

v on Thursday, December 27, 2018 6:24 AM
Reply to comment

Add a Comment

Your Name:
Email Address: (Required)
Make your text bigger, bold, italic and more with HTML tags. We'll show you how.
Post Comment
Website Builder provided by  Vistaprint