Re: And the Empire Strikes back...

On Mar 22, 1:21 pm, Sewer Rat <ratfromthese...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just curious: why didn't you also post the letter from Maja Arnez?

I simply didn't see it. Overlooked it.

However, in regard to the above, I would note that the following
excerpt seems to nicely sum up the whole controversy:

" Dr. Donta's clinical experience with "several thousand
patients" [11, p. 1134] with post-Lyme disease syndrome is somewhat
surprising, in light of the difficulty experienced in finding
eligible
subjects for the 3 published controlled-treatment trials of post-Lyme
disease syndrome conducted by other investigators. To enroll just 184
subjects in total, intensive efforts were required that included
increasing the time period for recruitment [3, 15] and adding
additional study sites [3]".

In other words, Dr. Donta's personal observations, and the reports of
affected patients...we find not only unpersuasive...but to the extent
that they seem to conflict with our definitions of Lyme disease...we
will assume that these patients did not, in fact, have Lyme disease.

Argument through exclusion and definition.

We simply define away problematic evidence...and ignore empirical
evidence that is inconsistnet with our laboratory-derived theories.


.