IDSA Lyme disease review panel date set for July 30th! New calendar attached

Byldoadmin

 

 

 

Who/What

When/Where

Applications for presenting to panel

(Patients, clinicians, researchers—preference given to clinicians and researchers)

April 17th

Document submissions contesting recommendations

April 24th

Presenters notified of acceptance

May 15th

Hearing

July 30th

Place of hearing

Unknown other than somewhere in Washington DC

Public meeting

The hearing will be aired live over the IDSA website– A taped archive will be available online after the hearing

 

Similar Posts

  • LymePolicyWonk: IDSA Lyme disease survey results out! What’s important to patients?

    Over 6,100 responded to our IDSA survey within one month! That’s YOU being engaged. Everyone who has worked on this project has been deeply touched by your responses. In addition to answering our survey questions, over 1,700 patients offered their thoughts in a tiny comment box. I have to say, I was unprepared for the depth of responses offered. I know that those of us who reviewed the comments teared up. You may too.

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: AIDS Advocacy–A Model for Change

    This is a terrific resource that explains what made the AIDS patient advocacy movement successful. It's is available for free. Here's an excerpt: "Change is possible. But in order to
    create change, the focused voices of advocates must be heard through the din. Individuals and organizations must do the hard work of becoming ready to question the status quo, and be smart enough to present well-founded alternatives. Strong leaders in government must pave the path and prepare to stay the course. Specific strategies with clear goals must be established in order to hold people accountable."

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: THE COST OF DENIAL—THE DOLLARS AND SENSE OF IT

    The cost of an illness includes medical and non-medical costs. Insurers bear the burden of medical costs for covered care, while society bears the cost of non-medical burdens. Saving a buck from insurance costs, only to spend 4 bucks on non-medical costs helps insurers at the expense of society. It really shifts the burden of an illness from the insurer to society. A recent article by Dr. Cameron makes this relationship in Lyme disease clear. The article "Proof that Chronic Lyme Disease Exists" was published as an open access article (meaning you can read it and download it without cost). He has done a thoughtful job pulling together statistics from a number of different studies to demonstrate the high rate of persistence of arthritis, neurocognitive impairment, neuropathy, skeletal pain and fatigue for years after treatment in patients diagnosed with Lyme disease. For instance, the rate of persistence of symptoms in patients after short term treatment for Lyme disease was 34% in Massachusetts.

  • 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: Patient Centered Research and Lyme—An idea whose time has come?

    A friend forwarded to me the audio link (at the end of this blog) of an interview with Dr. Iain Chalmers of the Cochrane Collaboration—a leading voice in evidence based medicine. Dr. Chalmers, who is interested in the patient perspective in evidence-based medicine, made a number of points that I think you will find of interest. First, he said, research agendas should be driven by patient concerns rather than by researchers’ preferences. There’s an interesting idea. Then he said that physicians have to make a decision today and cannot wait for the research. That sounds right, too. He went on to say that when you are looking at outcomes, the clinical experiences of those who receive the intervention or treatment are the key—these experiences are not the soft data, they are, in fact, the “hard” evidence. Finally, he noted the difficulty of getting “disappointing” results published. Disappointing results can be trials that don’t turn out as planned or that contradict what the researcher expected. His last quote regarding academic researchers in particular stuck with me and should resonate with the Lyme community: “If you have a cherished hypothesis which your career has ridden on for the past 20 years and someone does a really killer experiment which actually shows that you have been wrong all that time, the natural reaction, the human reaction is to say “there must be something wrong with it”—“I can’t have been wrong all these years”. It all sort of takes me back to the Embers monkey study and the complaints of Dr. Baker’s (formerly of the NIH and now the head of the American Lyme Disease Foundation, which many patients believe is a front for the Infectious Diseases Society of America).