LYMEPOLICYWONK: IOM Workshop—Where Do I Draw the Line on Fairness?
This combined with the fact that the IOM panel is excluding ILADS physicians entirely from speaking looks to me like suppression of opposing viewpoints. Someone with a PsyD degree who characterizes Lyme as a psychiatric malady (Afton Hassett) and has published with Dr. Lenny Sigal (whose dogmatic views are known) was selected to speak on biomarkers of the disease over people far more qualified (take Dr. Ben Luft, for instance).
Other physicians who you would expect to be more open-minded are relegated to 10 minute slots on panels. When you get out of the “medicine” side of the equation, things look more balanced, but it is the medicine side that is going to harm patients and without balance there, I don’t see how this process has a shot at scientific truth. The IOM says the conference is not about treatment, but Wormser will undoubtedly talk about the 4 treatment trials and Aguero-Rosenfeld, who worked with Wormser until recently, is slotted to speak on diagnosis.
The “product” of the hearing is a report of the proceedings. With Wormser and Aguero-Rosenfeld viewpoints unopposed, that is the only “record” that can go into the report for treatment and diagnosis. I do not see how that result is either credible or objective. Or how it serves the needs of patients. Let me know your views.
You can contact Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA at lbjohnson@lymedisease.org.
