Post
by itsy » Thu 15 Jan 2009 16:22
I think...and I could be wrong here...
That it is his opinion that a doctor is discreditied in the mianstream, scientifically accepted community when, for example, their license is yanked by the state, for example.
And that WOULD be true. My LLMD says her doctor is Dr. Jemsek. She says he is brilliant. This may be true, I don't know him personally...however she herself appears vastly improved since she has been seeing him. I can actually SEE the difference. However, having to move to a different state because of issues makes a doctor look like a cad, not a hero, in the eyes of peers and those "above" said doctor in the whole political sceme of things.
I do not disagree with the points made here by lymemd. This is what I have been trying to say since the start, though he seems to say it much more clearly and eloquently than I. He isn't slamming them, per se, other than pointing out there have been mistakes made that have brought down the credibility of the lyme patient.
We instinctivey want to protect our doctors and definately stick up for those who make us better and believe in us. And many see them as heroes standing up against a corrupt system. While this MIGHT be true to a degree, it doesn't matter when viewed from the mainstream.
Docs who get their privledges yanked are seen as crooks by their peers. They do become discredited even if the patients see it differently. It hurts the lyme community, whether the docs meant to scam people or not, it still brings down the legitimacy of those who suffer from the disease in a chronic form.
I am sorry but that is the truth.
I keep saying there has to be massive reform, because what lymies and ILADS are doing at the moment isn't working for us. We have dug our own holes. Look, a lot of docs afiliated with ILADS are awesome. I know mine is awesome. I am sure others are as well. But a few high profile bad eggs pushing CAM and a few items of bad press when even the ones who have been said to be good go too far hurt us.
I have been called a stricker basher, though I really do not dislike the guy. I think, after a brief communication with him online that he is smart and graceful. But I do not think it is wise of him to bring his history and mistakes in AIDS reseach to the lyme playing field so publically. If I'd made a faux pas like he did, I would keep a low profile for the sake of the patients I treat. I wouldn't want MY history tainting the cause I was involved with and would respectfully work behind the scenes and support those who have a squeekier/cleaner past.
Lyme MD is telling te truth. At at very least I strongly agree with his opinion. He wants to wake people up about the pitiful state of what is going on. Meanwhile its ILADS (not the individuals docs on the frontlines but the spotlighted uberalties and nefarious ones) shooting us in the foot and playing into the hands of the IDSA. Some of them make it all too easy.
I know it is an ugly truth, that those on our side make us look ridiculous sometimes, but it is true. And mainstream doctors are taught that Lyme is nothing and that there isn't another side other than quacks profitting off patients. Its not really the fault of the common doctor. Until we reform the community and shift perceptions on how we present ourselves to the mainstream, we are not going to win this debate in a public forum. This is a case of just because its always been done this way doesn't mean its the right way. And that Einstein/AA saying about doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is insanity in its purest form comes into play here. I know my opinion on this isn't always popular, but I cannot see it any other way.