The Connecticut Medical Board and the North Carolina Medical Board Learned Nothing from the New York Medical Board After Years of Researching Lyme Treatment Standards.
They Abuse Lyme, Babesia and Bartonella Infection Experts and Remove PATIENT CHOICE.
They Attack the Most Experienced Thought Leaders in Clinical Medicine in this Area of Medicine.
Persistent or Chronic Lyme Disease:
The New York State Position for Tolerance and Patient Choice
After two years of expensive legal hearings and appeals, Dr. Joseph Burrascano, author of guidelines that have been followed by many physicians who treat chronic Lyme disease, was exonerated first in the decision of his hearing panel, and then again when the Administrative Review Board refused the appeal by OPMC [New York Board of Medicine] and affirmed his exoneration on all the charges relating to Lyme disease.
On April 22, 2002 Dr. Burrascano received the anxiously awaited decision by the Administrative Review Board of the OPMC. The ARB affirmed the hearing panel's determination that OPMC was prosecuting a bias in a medical science dispute, not medical misconduct.
The original panel decision, received 11/08/01 and affirmed on appeal, Dr. Burrascano was exonerated in relation to most of the 39 charges that the NY OPMC brought against him... [nothing] would prevent him from continuing to practice or to treat Lyme patients according to his best judgment [Traditional MD's who follow the ISDA approach and CDC approach of 2-4 weeks of a highly specific Lyme antibiotic treatment with limited deer tick co-infection evaluation which is just emerging in my textbooks and the work of many thousands of fine diverse researchers and clinicians is not a major focus].
Activists note that unlike other cases, the administrative law judge in Dr. B's trial allowed him to present medical literature into evidence which justified his method. This evidence very much influenced the panel, which points to the need to reform OPMC process law so that medical literature evidence is allowed in all OPMC hearings. [The major criticism of agencies and groups who promote the "cure" of Lyme in 2-4 weeks with one medication for all is that chronic Lyme and the use of longer treatments found in articles were grossly ignored in the manner of a Nazi book burning and that such certainty in a field of emerging tick and flea infections is outrageously arrogant. In many of these agencies the leaders are so overlapped we are talking about perhaps 20 primary leaders and perhaps 80 more MD's are actually telling 800,000 how to treat 6.6 billion humans. And insurance companies love it because they have been exposed in SICKO and other places as corrupt to the core with greed at a sociopathic level at times].
Furthermore, both the hearing panel decision and that of the Administrative Review Board criticized the expert relied upon by OPMC as an expert investigator and as their expert witness at Dr. B's trial, for reading the patient records selectively, being in error about their content, and failing to acknowledge his error on cross examination. This reinforces the need for reform of the early investigative stage so that such bias and incompetence could be ferreted out.
Excerpts from the Burrascano decision:
"With respect to incompetence/gross incompetence, the petitioner [OPMC] failed to meet its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent [Dr.B] lacked the requisite skill or knowledge to practice medicine. The issues raised in this case pertained primarily to a medical debate in this field, rather than a demonstrated lack of competency by the Respondent."
..."The Hearing Committee recognizes the existence of the current debate within the medical community over issues concerning management of patients with recurrent or long term Lyme disease. This appears to be a highly polarized and politicized conflict, as was demonstrated to this committee by experts testimony from both sides, each supported by numerous medical journal articles, and each emphatic that the opposite position was clearly incorrect... What clearly did emerge however, was that the Respondent's approach, while certainly a minority viewpoint, is one that is shared by many other physicians. We recognize that the practice of medicine may not always be an exact science, "issued guidelines" are not regulatory, and patient care is frequently individualized.
"We are also acutely aware that it was not this Committee's role to resolve this medical debate, but rather to answer the questions raise in the statement of charges."
This material above was derived from faim.org/lyme.htm.
It was modified, edited, bolded and underlined in places.
I wonder how many of the Board members actually looked over what another state did over many years to try to see what they learned--that would be called 6th grade research. So after one of the largest states in the USA had to deal with this Lyme nonsense for years, and at massive taxpayer and physician expense, we see it emerge again in other states. Not just in Connecticut and North Carolina, but also in New Jersey and Texas.
I will soon have out a textbook which shows that roughly 15 diverse issues are being ignored in Tick and Flea infection treatment, by most practitioners and most agencies. For example, I did not notice in any Lyme treatment guideline the patented Lyme biotoxin Bb Tox 1.
Nor do I see that anyone seems to know virtually anything useful about the treatment of "atypical" Bartonella, which is much more common then silly current numbers using junk labs and which can kill and has about 200 symptoms, and is fully ignored and is in so many vectors like ticks and fleas and dust mites and cat contact, that it may make Lyme look highly small in cases in the next decade, even as deer expand in numbers and states. And Bartonella has very powerful immune suppressor chemicals which make it hard to kill many infections.
In my textbook on Babesia I reported that Mexico, obviously near our border, found 1/3 people with a form of Red Blood Cell parasite (Babesia) that was not supposed to be in people. Babesia has forms all over the USA and is treated in ways and with dosing we have found flawed.
But some physicians and prosecution lawyers with 9th grade science capacities have all the answers and are arrogant enough to actually feel THEY have mastered this area enough to set state standards which will lead to deaths and disability. These MD's are cheap political appointees, who deserve to be tossed out for having cognitive simplicity ugly for such a highly complex and emerging field of medicine.
So in contrast to the know it alls, I will show in my next medical textbook some reasons for the "mystery" about why some Lyme patients do so poorly with all types of short and long treatment, and show we ALL have much to learn and discover... Unless you are a member of the Connecticut Medical Board and the North Carolina Medical Board, then you know all things after listening to a few polemic and biased research burning pseudo experts, with less experience then those being accused and who have been rejected as useless by tens of thousands of patients and their families.