Pick a little, talk a little–How to make a speech for IDSA Lyme review panel

Most guidelines panels are heavily populated by academics. Why is that? Take the IDSA guidelines Lyme disease panel in 2006—all academic researchers. Researchers are good at science, but what about medicine? Does good science make good medicine? Not necessarily.

On September 29th, Congressman Christopher Smith (NJ) introduced into the Congressional Record a report exposing the gaps in research in Lyme disease. The report was originally commissioned by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) from the California Lyme Disease Association, the national Lyme Disease Association, and Time for Lyme. However, the three groups pulled out of the IOM process because of a lack of transparency and the high degree of bias in the process, which undermined its integrity and could harm patients. The Congressional Record represents an opportunity to communicate key research gaps in Lyme disease in a credible venue. The report is available on line. The press release about the Research Gaps Report and the link to the Congressional Record of the report, follow. . .

The Minnesota Board of Medical Practice (MBMP) has agreed to a five-year moratorium on the investigation, disciplining or issuance of corrective action based solely on long-term prescription or administration of antibiotic therapy for chronic Lyme disease. Minnesota joins a growing list of states that provide physician protection either through legislation or agreement, including California, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New York. The MBMP took the action as a compromise to prevent pending physician protection legislation from passing. Any way you look at it, it was a good day for Lyme patients in Minnesota.