Re: The LDA is wrong about the IDSA Guidelines


magruder wrote:
med_docsum

And I really wish you would "get it" about
band intensity.

Well, again, as I said, I am not of a technical background. (Not sure
what you mean here...but as a now-aging boomer, I feel comfortable in
saying that I feel the Doors and Led Zeppelin were fairly intense...as
bands go...back then)...

How about this?

I promise not to do science if you promise not to do law.

Okay?


All of this means, we only can look for Borrelia-specific
flagellin as the only VALID way to test for Lyme, since
everyone seems to make antibodies to flagellin, regardless
of their HLA type. Yale says in their patent the "VAST
MAJORITY" of all cases of Lyme, have an antibody to
flagellin.

Okay. Fine. But I say again to you that the apparent failure of Yale or
anyone else associated with this,to eventually pursue this, doesn't
necessarily indicate wrongdoing...even if the methods you are talking
about are technically, scientifically superior.

ALL OF THAT means the IDSA Guidelines are bogus
because they are all based on Klempner's study which was
invalid, because the testing was invalid.

Well, as I think I said before, my focus here was simply on trying to
understand what they say...rather than whether they are scientifically
valid or not.

The testing is deliberately bogus, therefore anything the
bad guys have said about patients who test positive to
the bogus Steere method (or who don't) is INVALID.

Again, what has to be shown in order for you to sustain that type of
allegation is, that they knew, as you say, that the "testing is
deliberately" bogus. I would imagine that in this context, this would
be extremely difficult, if not virtually impossible.

Now, you can regard what I just said as I am lacking in testicular or
intestinal fortitude if you want...but I assure you that I regard it as
extremely practical hard-headed, realistic advice.

You know...litigation is something you really shouldn't approach with a
"damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" mentality. (There, I just helped
you justify the cross-postings to the Navy group...don't say I never
did anything for you). Kamikaze attacks (Okinawa campaign, WWII, there,
did it again)...don't help either.

The problem you are going to have... and should have... with lawyers
looking at any of this is that they will tell you that opposing views
of a scientific controversy are just not sufficient to justify a
prosecution for fraudulent conduct.

It is, as I believe, I recall you mentioned you were told before,
"their word aginst yours"...or words to that effect.

Yeah...a battle of dueling credentialed expert witnesses.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The LDA is wrong about the IDSA Guidelines
    ... what has to be shown in order for you to sustain that type of ... allegation is, that they knew, as you say, that the "testing is ... ALL OF THAT means the IDSA Guidelines are bogus ... invalid, ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)
  • Re: ldap_routing and local aliases
    ... I checked with both a valid and invalid address, and except for the address, both had the same output, where the message passed through all the rules and selected a mailer. ... rewrite: ruleset PseudoToReal returns: bogus ... bogus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx deliverable: mailer cyrusv2, user bogus@xxxxxxxxx ...
    (comp.mail.sendmail)
  • Re: Defeating windows genuine check?
    ... Not pertinent to the post - but a little story of interest. ... A friend was ... subjected to notice was that his XP was invalid - ... bogus XP and ends up with two legal copies!! ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)