Re: "Quackbusting" - is a Profitable Business

(just a reminder of some good news ... after this doctor was put thru
hell )

Total Victory...

Dear Supporters,

Thank you for your support all these years, both financial and
personal.

As most of you know, Dr. Sinaiko won at the Appellate level. The
Appellate Court had ruled that the Superior Court ruling was
overturned and the Medical Board would have to hear the case again
under orders to accept the testimony of Dr. Sinaiko's witnesses. The
Medical Board delayed and delayed, and we were beginning to wonder if
they were never going to hear his case again ....... but finally they
agreed to withdraw all their charges ... as though it never happened
..... in return for which Dr. Sinaiko agreed not to sue them. Another
Guerrilla Team WitchHunt ...

If you look at the Doctor Finder website now, at
http://www.medbd.ca.gov/Lookup.htm you will see there is nothing
negative on there. Like it never happened.

It almost seems anticlimactic to end the long battle so quietly, but
the importance of this case cannot be underestimated. It was a
catalyst, a watershed case, which has changed the history of medicine
in California -- and thereby the whole country. There is a new law
in California which no longer allows a doctor to be persecuted for
using alternative medical treatments; the California Medical
Association has stood up for the rights of a doctor, opposing the
authority of the Medical Board; even the national medical magazines
Medical Economics and The Townsend Letter ran major articles
supporting Dr. Sinaiko and raising awareness of the criminal behavior
of the Medical Board. We fervently hope that this lesson in
accountability will not be so easily forgotten by the new members of
the Medical Board.

It is now Spring, and Easter, a time of rebirth and new hope. It's an
appropriate time to win a case like this.

Best wishes,

Shula Edelkind
http://www.treatmentchoice.org
Feingold Association

Challenging Quackwatch’s Position on Lyme Disease

http://www.redflagsdaily.com/my_opinion/2005_jun23.html

By Marjorie Tietjen
Director For Lyme Concerns
Common Cause Medical Research Foundation

The honest unvarnished truth concerning Lyme Disease, it’s
co-infections and chronic illness will be exposed. Deception and fraud
eventually bring about their own demise. This is simply a natural law
of the universe. In the meantime, however, we need to be alert to the
methods used to deceive concerning this particular medical cover up.
Here is a link to the article I am challenging.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/lyme.html

The folks at Quackwatch claim they have no financial and or political
ties to government/corporations. Anyone can say this, but it would be
difficult to prove. Actions, attitudes and results speak louder than
words. “By their fruits ye shall know them.” From what I’ve read on
this website, it appears that the writers are extremely one- sided in
their views and seem inclined to attack and ridicule.

They speak a lot about “approved studies” and base many of their
conclusions on these studies, many of which are carried out by
universities and government agencies which are funded by the drug
companies. Of course, many drug companies directly carry out their own
research studies. Doesn’t it seem very likely that their studies would
be heavily biased?

Just for the record, I don’t believe that there is a single study out
there that can prove the nonexistence of chronic active Lyme disease,
but there are studies out there that irrefutably prove that Lyme can
still be present in the body after many months of antibiotic
treatment. http://www.lymeinfo.net/lymefiles.html. The Greater
Hartford Lyme Disease Support and Action Group has put up a US$10,000
reward to anyone who can prove that Lyme disease is always cured
within 30 days of antibiotics and can never become actively chronic.
This reward has been posted for over a year now and so far no one has
responded. Many are beginning to observe that it is the private
researchers, who have no such affiliations, who are being harassed and
labeled as quacks, even when their work produces favorable results.

Whatever happened to clinical observation and experience? Thousands of
patients who have been labeled with various “autoimmune” diseases,
have finally tested positive for Lyme, and were treated with long-term
antibiotics, have either reclaimed much of their health, or at least
have arrested their disease process. Not everyone improves however, as
is also the case with many other accepted allopathic treatments.
Reversing disability and sometimes death are the fruits of the Lyme
doctors who are dedicated to their patients.

What are the fruits of the mainstream medical system? All I see are
symptomatic treatments for the plethora of symptoms caused by a single
disease. Lyme disease can present with 40 or more symptoms. Every day
we hear of a new drug advertised on T.V. to treat all those various
symptoms. There is no long term profit in promoting a cure or a drug
which would keep the disease process at bay.

The Quackwatch article brought up two therapies - malaria therapy and
ICHT (hyperthermia). These two treatments do seem to be more on the
extreme end and I would advise a patient to do extensive research
before undertaking these therapies. However, in the end, it should
always be the patients’ prerogative as to what treatments the patients
employ. I think most of us are old enough to make these decisions and
if this is really a free country we would have total access to any
treatment, drug or natural remedy.

The next therapy which was mentioned was hyperbaric oxygen therapy
(HBO). I have heard of many positive and encouraging experiences from
people who have tried this therapy. However, frequently people have to
go for follow-up sessions, when and if symptoms recur at a later time.
And then, as with accepted allopathic treatment, sometimes for certain
people there is no improvement. Everyone is different. The author
mentioned an anecdote which seems to be for the purpose of suggesting
that those who offer natural treatments are all shysters. The story
mentioned that the director of a clinic, where a patient had her
unsuccessful HBO treatment, would not refund her money. How many drug
companies do you know of that refund our money when their drugs don’'t
work for a particular patient ... or even causes serious side effects?

HBO treatment may be fairly expensive but it is noninvasive and
effective for many. Quackwatch brings up the fact that no studies have
been implemented for the treatment of Lyme disease with HBO therapy.
This implies that it is not even worth a try. If HBO therapy is so
effective for other disorders then why hasn’t an “accepted” medical
study been done in this area? I would think it would uncover very
valuable information concerning the role of oxygen in the treating of
many infectious diseases. Maybe this is why there are no studies.
Again, cures do not result in profit.

The use of colloidal silver was also frowned upon by the author of the
Quackwatch article. From what I’ve learned, colloidal silver (CS) was
used successfully for many purposes before modern antibiotics were
ever invented. Perhaps the use of this substance is discouraged
because drug companies would be unable to patent this natural product.
It also can be easily made at home. I am acquainted with many patients
who take CS on a regular basis and most have been helped immensely. It
may or may not be a cure in every instance but it appears to arrest
the disease process and many have experienced vast improvement. I have
yet to see anyone turn gray ... which was the reason Quackwatch gave
for not taking CS. The article states that the FDA is not aware of any
substantial scientific evidence that supports the use of CS for
diseases listed in the article. Well, maybe then it’s time to initiate
some studies to investigate this apparently helpful substance.

Another subject covered was the alleged overuse of IV antibiotics. The
more prevalent use of oral antibiotics and the fact that they are much
cheaper, was not discussed. Intravenous antibiotics are known,
potentially, to have more severe side effects than oral antibiotics so
it would be prudent to administer sufficient doses of orals whenever
possible, before resorting to the IV. In some severe neurological
cases, some doctors would, of course, want to try the IV antibiotics
first. Using orals, whenever possible, before going the IV route is
already the policy of most Lyme literate physicians. Many times higher
doses of specific oral antibiotics will travel through the blood brain
barrier with as much efficiency as the IV antibiotics if taken for a
long enough period.

All this is not to say that there are no unscrupulous IV companies out
there, just as it would be ludicrous to believe there are no
unscrupulous pharmaceutical companies foisting thousands of
symptomatic treatments on those with chronic illness. Most of these
drugs cause a vast range of symptoms directly attributed to the drugs
themselves, which then calls for more symptomatic treatments to cover
up the new symptoms. The more drugs are prescribed, the more money
the drug companies rake in. I truly believe this is the primary reason
why Lyme is such a political disease and why we are being denied the
necessary antibiotics. Syphilis is a very close spirochetal cousin to
Lyme disease. If you are not already familiar with the Tuskegee
experiment, I would suggest researching into that government crime.

Concerning my own case, I was not diagnosed until eight years in to
the disease. I was told I had Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, which, of
cours,e has no cure ­- only symptomatic treatments. This late
diagnosis resulted in tertiary or late stage Lyme disease with much
brain and nervous system involvement. At this point I was very
grateful to have found a doctor who has had success in treating many
chronic Lyme patients. This doctor tested me via the Western Blot.
Although I was negative, this doctor knew, according to my symptoms,
history and location, that I was most likely infected with borrelia
burgdorferi (Bb), the causative agent of Lyme disease. I was treated
with a high dose of doxycycline, which is known to penetrate the blood
brain barrier at higher than normal doses. I did have herxheimer
reactions which lessened with each month of treatment. There does
appear to be a cyclic nature to the herxheimer and this may have to do
with the life cycle of the Lyme bacteria and its pleomorphic nature. I
did not even begin to show improvement till the end of the fourth
month. After the four months some of the symptoms were gone and others
were diminished in severity.

At this point, I was retested using the Western Blot and I was
positive. This happens to quite a few patients. It is believed that
this phenomenon is due to the breaking up of the circulating immune
complexes. In other words, those who are sickest with the disease are
the most likely to test negative, until enough spirochetes are killed
off, which then would make antibodies available for measurement. This
may partly explain the difficult time the Columbia University study
had in finding patients to meet their study entrance criteria. There
are many reasons why you can test negative and still have Lyme
disease.
http://www.mentalhealthandillness.com/seronegativelymedisease.html

After six years of intermittent treatment, I improved greatly, but it
was not until I have been on antibiotics, consistently now for a year
and a half, that I finally feel that I have my life back. It is
important to realize that you also have to be treated holistically in
order to receive substantial improvement. This can include lifestyle
changes, changes in diet, certain herbal supplements, probiotics and
other natural treatments. The immune system must be supported.

I know from first hand experience that chronic active Lyme is real and
that the longer one goes without treatment, the more difficult the
microbe is to eradicate. I was headed for total disability but thanks
to the few brave doctors out there who treat chronic Lyme, I am now
leading an almost normal life. It’s an obvious example of cause and
effect. Patients are sick with a chronic illness, they are treated
with appropriate doses of antibiotics, for the needed length of time
and, so, most people significantly improve. I really don’t see why
there should be a controversy, unless, of course, the controversy is
related to politics and profits.

Now, as far as transmission of Lyme disease from the mother to the
fetus is concerned, Quackwatchers tell us “there have been no
documented cases of mother-child transmission and no cases of fetal
injury associated with a lyme infection.” A recent state hearing in
Connecticut featured a testimony which did document mother-child
transmission. Three years prior to the hearing, Elise Brady-Moe was
misdiagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. About half a year later she
tested positive for Lyme disease and was treated for seven months with
antibiotics before she felt safe enough to conceive a child. She was
18 weeks pregnant when her baby died. The placenta and the fetus
tested PCR positive for Lyme disease. Brady-Moe then went on another
round of antibiotics for six months before conceiving her next child.
It did not survive past nine weeks. She again requested a Lyme test
and again the placenta was PCR positive for Lyme. Her problems went on
for a bit more and you can view her whole testimony, along with the
rest of the hearing proceedings at
http://www.cslib.org/attygenl/health/0129lyme.pdf . Here you will find
many other testimonies describing the life shattering effects of
chronic Lyme disease.

Does Quackwatch feel that all these people are lying and that testing
records were falsified? Or are they simply ignorant of the facts?

Under the heading of Political Aspects, the writer of the Quackwatch
article goes on to ridicule those who form support groups for chronic
Lyme sufferers. Evidently he is implying there is no such thing as
chronic Lyme and that those who believe that they have Lyme, and form
support groups, must be delusional. Chronic Lyme is not a belief
system or a religion or a figment of the imagination. It is a
devastating chronic progressive neurological disease, as is its cousin
syphilis. Patients are demanding and certain doctors are prescribing
long-term antibiotics because they work ... period! Syphilis, which
is also a spirochete, also frequently requires open ended antibiotic
treatment. Why would it be so surprising to find out that Lyme could
also be congenitally and sexually transmitted, as syphilis is?

Patients and knowledgeable physicians criticize those who block their
treatments for an obvious reason; they want to get well. Clinical
experience, testing and autopsies have proven that Lyme can be a
chronic infection.

Before the Smithkline Beecham Lyme vaccine ever hit the market, many
informed people in the Lyme community were aware that 30% of vaccine
recipients, with a specific genetic marker, would be at risk of
developing an immune arthritis which could be worse than Lyme disease
itself and would be incurable. SmithKline Beecham did not advise the
public of this fact. When the vaccine came out it was being
administered at drug stores, grocery stores, etc. To my knowledge,
there were no doctors present or literature to explain this risk or to
ask the recipients if they currently had Lyme disease, as this was
another risk factor. I stood outside of grocery stores handing out
information which fairly presented both sides of the controversy. I
wanted people to have the information so they could intelligently
decide for themselves whether or not to receive the vaccine. Two
people, who worked at this grocery store, and saw me distributing
material, told me they were in the vaccine trial study and they were
now newly labeled with Fibromyalgia.

I was present at a Lyme disease conference where SmithKline Beecham
had sent a representative to speak to us. There were many doctors in
the audience, along with patients and advocates. The whole
presentation consisted of a slide show showing the different types of
Lyme rashes. When the speaker was finished, a doctor stood up and said
we were hoping you would share with us information concerning the
reported adverse reactions of the vaccine. The SmithKline Beecham Rep.
stated that there were no significant reactions observed or reported.
A very loud, collective groan rose from the audience. We knew that to
be a complete lie. Doctors were continually being faced with vaccine
recipients who had either become much worse or they now had Lyme
disease where they didn’t before. Of course, not everyone was
adversely affected. We want to know why SmithKline Beecham did not
warn the public that a significant number of people, (30% of the
population) could contract a serious disease (Treatment Resistant
Arthritis), from this vaccine.

In front of me I have a copy of a Class Action Law Suit with Karen
Cassidy as the plaintiff and SmithKline Beecham as the defendant.
Cassidy was also representing others who were adversely affected by
the vaccine. It is rather long, but I would like to include the
following excerpt which summarizes the deception involved:

“73. The Defendant (SmithKline Beecham) has made or caused to be
made, through advertisements, directly or indirectly, explicitly or by
implication, representations and omissions of fact which are material,
false, deceptive and/or likely to mislead consumers, including but not
limited to the following:

1. That the LYMErix vaccine was safe and effective for it's intended
use.

2. That the LYMErix vaccine did not pose an increased risk of
Treatment Resistant Lyme Arthritis to those vaccinees who are HLA -
DR4+.

3. The Defendant had fully disclosed it’s knowledge of the heightened
risks and incidence of adverse reactions, including but not limited to
the heightened risk of Treatment Resistant Lyme Arthritis among HLA -
DR4+ vaccinees;

4. That LYMErix was safe and effective to those individuals suffering
from asymptomatic or early Lyme disease at the time of vaccination;
and

5. That a single course of LYMErix vaccination would provide permanent
or continuous protection against Lyme disease.

74. Contrary to Defendant’s representations:

1. LYMErix vaccine is neither safe nor effective for its intended
use;

2. Vaccinees with HLA-DR4+ gene are at a significantly increased risk
of developing Treatment Resistant Lyme Arthritis;

3. Defendant has suppressed and concealed material information
developed by or otherwise known to them concerning the adverse health
effects and/or incidence of adverse reactions associated with the
vaccine, including but not limited to increased risk of Treatment
Resistant Lyme Arthritis;

4. Vaccinees suffering from asymptomatic or early Lyme disease, at
the time of vaccination, will suffer from a more progressive and
enhanced Lyme disease than they would have absent the vaccine;

5. The LYMErix vaccination requires that, in order to maintain the
advertised levels of protection against Lyme disease, vaccinees shall
require booster shots with as-yet undetermined frequency, thereby
exposing vaccinees who are HLA -DR4+, to heightened and ongoing risk
and expense.

75. Defendant’s deceptive representations and actions and omissions of
fact have been and are material, false, deceptive and /or likely to
mislead consumers about the adverse health consequences of LYMErix and
therefore constitute deceptive acts or practices.”

Here is a link to an article discussing this vaccine fiasco
http://www.sheller.com/Practice.asp?PracticeID=32

So, do you think that SmithKline Beecham withdrew its vaccine from the
market due to simple lack of public interest, as SmithKline Beecham
and Quackwatch states? Or is it more likely that so many people were
harmed by the vaccine and that this was the cause for it being taken
out of circulation?

I rest my case.

"They speak a lot about approved studies and base many of their
conclusions on these studies, many of which are carried out by
universities and government agencies which are funded by the drug
companies. Of course, many drug companies directly carry out their own
research studies. Doesnt it seem very likely that their studies would be
heavily biased?"

Yes scientific research and publication in peer reviewed journals and
government approval is the gold standard. What would you have us use in
it's place? Would infomercials at 3 am be a good substitute? Would some
substance or method not shown to be either effective or safe but pushed by
some "believable" person do just fine? As for self intrest and
commercial intrest, someone will sell whatever alternative is out there on
the market.