LYMEPOLICYWONK: IOM LIVE BLOG PART III Public Comment

Byldoadmin

IOM Hearing: Public Comment Period

Pat Smith—President national Lyme Disease Association.  Addressed the need to identify treatment gaps and diversity of opinion in the final summary as well as the need to include real input from patients in an open and transparent way.  She expressed concern regarding the use of anonymous reviewers for the panel’s work.  Complete speech will be posted here

Diane Blanchard—Co-President Time for Lyme.  Addressed the issue of scientific bias and the importance of separating fact from opinion.  She also emphasized that it was important to listen to patients drawing the parallel to the discovery of Lyme by Polly Murphy, a mother in a local community. Complete speech will be posted here.

Greg Skall— Legal Counsel for National Capital.  Greg emphasized the need to listen to new researchers and not simply follow the research by a handful of researchers who have controlled the disease.

Helene Jargensen, Lyme Patient and author of Sick and Tired (Left copies of written testimony). Analyzed the 4 treatment studies and encourage the panel to invite Allison Delong to present the statistical analysis of the 4 treatment trials.

Panelist Q: Are there good definitions for treatment failure?

A: In my case I was feeling better after 3 weeks and then relapsed and responded to additional treatment.

 

Candy Brassard, EPA. Candy emphasized how emerging areas of Lyme disease particularly do not know about the risks of Lyme disease.  She noted that there was significant divergency among the states in terms of reporting cases.

Rick Smith, a Lyme patient, has had brain fog—what about the poor patient who is sitting here, offered as resources a presentation by Dr. Joe Jemsek, a copy of Under our Skin. 

Bob Smith, a patient with Lyme who works in computers.  We are missing matrixes to track the disease as well as feedback loops and continuous learning.

Julia Rice, a nurse for 30 years with Lyme, who had to quit her practice because of Lyme disease. 

Ann Lyons, attorney and Vice President of Time for Lyme, addressed the issue of the IDSA guidelines and the failure of the vote on the lab testing and how insensitive the lab tests are particularly for chronic late Lyme.  Her testimony will be provided in full on lymepolicywonk.org.    

Q: Open question from panel regarding the importance of vaccines:

Monte Skall, National Capital, If we do not have a diagnostic test that is 100% effective, how can we come up with a vaccine because you should not vaccinate people with Lyme disease as they can become more ill.

Pat Smith, any new vaccine would require a more rigorous safety review to ensure that people don’t become ill from the vaccine.

Q: Open question re chronic disease terminology:

Unknown male respondent:  You have chronic symptom, we have chronic disease.  The idea is how do you become symptom free.

 

Pat Smith: Most of the treating physicians regard chronic Lyme disease as existing when symptoms persist after treatment.

Gregg Skall:  Different terms because language is being redefined by researchers—chronic Lyme becomes late stage Lyme disease or becomes something else.  Most patient believe it is persisting symptoms.

Diane Blanchard: There are so many variables that effect this disease.  A person had a tick bite and there were never well  again.  This is how patients see it.

Others listed to speak who did not attend were Arthur Weinstein, Phil Baker, and Lynn Shepler.

You can follow additional comments on Lyme policy at www.lymepolicywonk.org.  You can contact Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA at lbjohnson@lymedisease.org.

Similar Posts

  • Attorney General Blumenthal Speaks Out! Now hear this. . .

    If you have not read the recent editorial by Attorney General Blumenthal published today in “The Day”—you are in for a treat. Despite the IDSA’s protests that the guideline review process is “voluntary”, Blumenthal observes that the IDSA “effectively admitted the flaws by agreeing to a review and reassessment of its 2006 guidelines by a conflicts-free panel”.

  • Publication Alert: IDSA Review Hearing Report–Lipstick on a Pig

    On April 22nd, the IDSA guidelines review hearing panel rubber-stamped its Lyme disease guidelines in its final report of the hearing. Those of us who presented and attended the hearing were appalled. Sure we had our reservations about the ability of a panel stacked with IDSA members to impartially review the guidelines, but there were 1,600 pages of peer reviewed evidence that had been presented to the panel and independent scientists had attested to the persistence of the Lyme bacteria and the low quality of the tests. How could they ignore the weight of such evidence? How could they decide to leave the guidelines completely unchanged even though a panel of their own choosing was divided on the testing? To make matters worse, the IDSA then trumpeted the results of a stacked panel as "independent" in their report. Dr. Stricker and I were given the opportunity to respond to the IDSA "spin" and our letter to the editor was just published. An excerpt follows:

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: Newly Discovered Tick Pathogen, Borrelia miyamotoi, May Increase Safety Risks for Patients in NIH Tick Feeding Study

    Researchers recently discovered that Borrelia miyamotoi, a species of corkscrew-shaped bacteria found in Asia, Europe and North America and previously thought to be non-pathogenic, causes human illness similar to Lyme disease. In a parallel study, it was shown that tick larvae carry B. miyamotoi and that ticks can transmit the bacteria via the ovaries to newly hatched larvae. This discovery highlights the risk to patients in a current NIH study from exposure to unidentified pathogens in tick larvae that may not have been detected by the researchers. The study allows live tick larvae to feed directly on patients. Researchers generally attempt to reduce the risk of transmitting illness to research subjects by using newly-hatched laboratory-raised larval ticks that don't carry known pathogens. Because it was not known that B. miyamotoi was pathogenic, larval ticks used in the study may not have been screened for this disease. Last January we asked the NIH to pull the plug on the study because of the risk that unidentified pathogens in tick larvae posed for patients enrolled in the study, and we filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the study approval documents. The NIH responded by acknowledging the risk of unidentified pathogen transmission to study participants and said the issues were considered during the study approval review. However, the study documentation does not show that the issue was either carefully considered or that adequate precautions were taken. Although the NIH study consent form advises patients of the risk of acquiring an unidentified illness, we do not believe that disclosure is sufficient. So, again, today, we take pen in hand and ask the NIH to demonstrate that the study is safe or pull the study entirely.

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: CDC Revolving Door Policy Suits Vaccine Manufacturers Just Fine

    Have you ever heard the saying “what goes around, comes around”? How about “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”. The revolving door between government and industry is cause for concern. The revolving door between the CDC and the vaccine industry is even greater cause for concern. The most recent revolving door has Dr. Julie Gerberding, the first woman to head the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, being named president of Merck’s vaccine division. Do you think she knows a thing or two about vaccines and how to get them through the process? Do you think she has connections? Dr. Gerberding comes from an infectious disease background.

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: Research Gaps Report by Lyme Groups Who Pulled Out of IOM Process Entered into Congressional Record

    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. . .

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: Was this important Lyme study hidden for 12 years?

    The recently published monkey study by Embers and colleagues regarding the persistence of Lyme after antibiotic treatment is important for two distinct reasons. The first is because of the scientific results of the study, explained in a 5-part article I posted on this blog last week. (Links follow this post.) The second, more troubling reason, is because publication of this important research was delayed for over a decade. And that delay has seriously harmed Lyme patients.