Re: the real issue in the Jones case


p...@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Rude strident person wrote:
> "And, the truth is that you don't know that your "access to care"
> defense has ANY RELEVANCE OR VALIDITY to the specifics of the charge
> here."
>
> And you don't know that the "access to care" argument WON'T buy
> something, so why not use it?

Why not? Because it might not have anything to do with anything and it
might make things worse as I explained in the thread entitled "Dr Jones
the mistakes so far"

>You waste energy battling chimeras - the
> lawyers WILL handle it. DUH.


Wrong. It ain't "chimeras" when people are already talking about and
planning things that no one has asked them to do and which could easily
make things worse--as I explain in a couple of examples on the other
thread.

>However if patients can start thinking of
> what the IDSA is doing to us in terms of reducing our already limited
> access to care, I think that is a valuable message that needs to get
> out there, in news stories, whenever we have an opportunity.


NO THIS IS ABOUT THESE CHARGES AND DR JONES AND HE IS NOT TO BE YOUR
CAUSE CELEBRE TO ADVANCE YOUR AGENDA YOU SELFISH SELF IMPORTANT NITWIT!

Let HIM decide. Let he and his lawyer decide.

Perhaps they want NO PUBLICITY AT ALL! Perhaps that would be the best
strategy--I don't know and neither do you.

So shut up and DO WHAT HE AND HIS LAWYER ASK ONLY IF AND WHEN THEY ASK
FOR IT AND DO ONLY THAT WHICH THEY ASK AND NOTHING MORE!!!

It is NOT your license or your life or your case.

> We are
> anticipating new IDSA guidelines in the spring - what do you think -
> will they be better or worse?

I honestly do not know. I don't see how they could be much worse.

>My guess is, worse.

Right. That is your GUESS.

>What are YOU doing
> about it? My guess would be, nothing. Do you think we should do nothing
> about that, also? Just let them kick us again, thank you very much.

What do you think can be done about it? Do you think a letter writing
campaign to attempt to suppress the guidelines is appropriate? Like you
idiots thought it was a good idea to try to have the NY TIMES kill the
story about Igenex? Nope, not a good idea. Freedom of expression.

What do I think SHOULD be done about it?

I think that the "llmds" ought to come up with their own EBM
guidelines--not the crap they put in that self published thing they
then charged people for in ERAITS.

And I think that a response should be prompt to refute that which is
refutable in whatever guidelines ARE put out. I think that "llmds"
ought to try to have some input into any new IDSA guidelines. And, no,
I don't think an angry patient pr campaign would make ANY difference at
least not for the better.

Sometimes doing SOMETHING is NOT better.

> There are many scenarios that can play out with the Jones case, and
> many possible points where patient interests could be inserted if
> people are thinking about it, thinking about who they know or
> connections they have.

IF AND ONLY IF DR JONES AND HIS LAWYER DECIDE THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT TO
DO!

> If you and your friends hadn't monopolized this
> board maybe we could have a productive discussion about it here.

Phyllis you biased moron--it was kathLOON and lisa who ruined this
board--while you stood by and did nothing to stop it, made no comments
about it and you have no right to complain now.

>but
> I'm not expecting anything except the usual abuse from you.

Okay then--go *** yourself Phyllis. And don't do ANYTHING unless asked
to for Dr Jones--sometimes help like the "help" you offer is like
asking for a hole in the head--you can and have made things worse in
the past. DO NO HARM PHYLLIS. And don't run off and do anything unless
and until Dr Jones and his legal team ask you to.

Got that?

Oh yeah--go *** yourself you preachy self righteous hunchbacked troll!
(there's some of the abuse you asked for)

.