"Scientific misconduct or criminal offense?" Petition update (Wormser's new biased study)

[Antares in NYC]

There's an update to the Change.org petition to investigate the conflicts of interest in Lyme research. A new study by Gary Wormser claims to deny Borrelia persistence by using only acute cases (recent infections) as sample subjects, while leaving out of the study individuals that have been sick longer.

By selecting only confirmed cases of acute early Lyme the results of the study are severely skewed; those individuals with confirmed acute Lyme were treated within the early window of time to successfully treat the disease without long-term complications. The results would have been completely different if he had used subjects that were also positive for Lyme, but didn't get the benefit of early intervention (late stage or disseminated Lyme).

The study claims there are no long-term effects to Lyme disease. This is causing some righteous indignation in the Lyme community at large:

Scientific misconduct or criminal offense?

Carl Tuttle
Nov 1, 2015 — To all who have signed this petition:

Please see the email below addressed to the Office of Research Integrity registering a complaint against Dr Gary Wormser of New York Medical College.

Wormser’s continual mishandling of Lyme disease is blatantly obvious in this NIH funded study where he uses taxpayer dollars to support his career long bias against persistent infection. The Office of Research Integrity limits its investigations to falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism (F/F/P) of research data so Wormser’s misclassification of disease to support his personal bias is overlooked.

Wormser’s inaccurate conceptualization of disease has influenced the nation's perceptions and response to Lyme disease. We are dealing with a life altering infection misclassified as a simple nuisance disease as reported by the Lyme patient population.

Consider sending a respectful email of your own to the Directors of the Office of Research Integrity describing how Wormser’s “nuisance disease” has affected you or a loved one.
(...)

https://www.change.org/p/the-us-sen...tigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/14006106?

Please sign the petition if you haven't done so already.

 

[duncan]

Signed.

 

[Antares in NYC]

I think what they are doing is the scientific equivalent of CYA. They have failed to cure or treat the disease, and miserably failed at containing the epidemic. That was the assignment the CDC and NIH gave them, and for two decades they have failed, and diverted time and resources in developing a failed and dangerous vaccine for which they had patents and saw as a potential cash cow. So their solution was to produce study after study with selected subjects (those cured within the early window of acute infection) while ignoring the increasingly growing number of people left severely ill by the disease.

Given the amount of research papers coming out in recent times demonstrating the persistence of Borrelia, I would have to agree that using the word "fraud" is not out of place. Just like the PACE trial in the UK. Scientific results on demand by carefully selecting the sample subjects.

 

[duncan]

Perhaps the word "disingenuous" might come to mind?

The problem isn't that IDSA treatment protocol doesn't cure people. It does. It can cure many people.

The problem is the possibly thousands upon thousands left uncured. Left sick.

So, how does this team appear to respond to this problem in this study? Evidently select a cohort of early stage Lyme patients whose infection was resolved. (I am assuming they were cured/resolved, else they should have noted Late Stage) Then interview them years later and report that 'Look! They are still well!!'

It is a hollow claim, particularly when any Lyme insider well knows the majority of issues surface when the disease progresses to Late Stage - just as with Syphilis. That's when treatment failures skyrocket.

It's like that classic SNL bit: "News Alert! Generalissimo Franco is still dead!"

Only, without the comedy.

 

[Antares in NYC]

This article basically expresses what we knew already:

http://newswire.net/newsroom/news/0...agree-most-researches-findings-are-fraud.html

Top Scientists Agree: Medical Research is Rife with Fraud

Half of all the medical literature is false according to Dr. Richard Horton, editor in chief of world’s best-known medical journal

The problem with scientific literature is that much of it may not be true or complete, according to Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet, world’s most well-respected peer-reviewed medical journal.

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue,” Dr. Horton commented in The Lancet.

According to Dr. Horton, there are various reasons for the gross inaccuracies; “studies with small sample sizes, tiny eff ects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflict,” he wrote.

Dr. Horton accused scientists of pursuing a “quest for telling a compelling story,” stating that scientists too often model data to fit the preferred theories or they tweak hypotheses to fit their data.

Actually, the questionable data is due to the nature of modern money dependent society where there is a constant urge for spending less and earning more. It is ‘publish or parish’ society that is driven by interest or fear of failure. However, journals and publications are not the “only miscreants.” According to Dr. Horton, “universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent,” which tempts scientists to slip towards dark side of science.

Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor in Chief of another one prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals, the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), agreed with Dr. Horton.
(...)