Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

For everything that is related to Lyme and/or Lymeland, but doesn't fit in the other forums. Speak your mind, connect, ask help, etc.
Post Reply
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon 1 Mar 2010 16:41

Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by LymeH » Thu 8 Apr 2010 6:20

I needed a good laugh before bedtime. I do like Oprah though. She stays out of diagnosing people over the television. Dr. Oz seems more out to gain viewers and spread fear so they keep watching his show - keep them dependent - more drugs, more diagnoses - keeps them coming back for more.

Some of the stuff that comes out of Columbia is very 'interesting'. Dr. Oz is from Columbia, as well as many in Lymeland.
07 April 2010
The Doctor is in(sane)
I found this fascinating piece of medical crap in a publication called Public Health Alert. It’s a newsletter put out by some women who think they have chronic Lyme disease. PHA is full of nonsense written (badly) by various Lyme disease quacks and charlatans. Judging from the advertisements for useless alternative medicine treatments and Lyme diagnostics, I’m guessing this online rag is sustained by such companies because it allows them to reach more gullible customers.

So here’s the brilliant LLMD, James Schaller on:

The 18 Reasons Lyme Treatments Fail:
Tick-Borne Infection Medicine for the New Millennium.

My average patient has been to 10-50 physicians before me.
[No doubt they’re working there way down from best to worst.]

Reason One

The current treatment dosing for Babesia is flawed. If Babesia is present, Lyme cure is impossible.
[I can’t believe this clown has a license to practice medicine. How hard is it to do two things at once: given clindamycin and quinine. The rest of the medical community doesn’t seem to have any trouble treating babesiosis and/or Lyme.]

Reason Two

The current testing for Babesia is markedly flawed.
[Assuming that’s true (and it’s not), what does it have to do with treatment failure in Lyme disease?]

Reason Three

Bartonella is simply the most common tick and flea-borne infection in the world.
[Again, the Lyme connection? And no, it’s not. Flea-borne, maybe. But there’s little evidence of Ixodes’ competence for transmitting Bartonella species to humans.]

Reason Four

All routine published Bartonella treatments appear to fail.

Reason Five

Since Lyme spirochetes can become cysts virtually instantaneously in the presence of threatening antibiotics, it does not make sense to use antibiotics without cyst-busting antibiotics (such as Flagyl), herbs or essential oils.
[This is bacteriological nonsense. Moreover, there’s no such thing as a “cyst-busting antibiotic.”]

Reason Six

Infections and inflammation decrease insight. This is largely due to an impaired frontal lobe behind your forehead that is involved in self-awareness.
[What the fuck!?]

Reason Seven

Some patients get ill after a flood, large leak or some other water intrusion problem. They feel they are ill only because of mold mycotoxins that form after 36-48 hours of wetness on drywall, insulation, carpeting and other dust or cellulose-filled materials.
[Hey, remember you’re supposed to be preaching about Lyme not mold?]

Reason Eight

Lyme appears to make many biotoxins.
[No. Not even one. Check GenBank.]

Reason Nine

A general physician in Maryland, working among massive deer ticks in his rural location, was smart enough to search for clinical applications of basic and accepted codes for transplant and disease medicine. These patterns can be found with a basic Wikipedia search.
[Again, huh? Wikipedia? “Massive deer ticks”? What…maybe the size of Buicks?]

Reason Ten

Starting doses of all medications should be very low and then raised to high levels with liver-protecting substances.
[Sounds like a recipe for encouraging antibiotic resistance and bacterial mutagenesis, not to mention prolonging the infection and adding to patient morbidity.]

Reason Eleven

“Band-Aids” are often required to save a job, a marriage and to care for children.
[???? Maybe in a practice too. Back to Lyme yet?]

Reason Twelve

If you have healthcare workers who do not feel comfortable being aggressive with treatment and diagnosis of all the top tick and flea infections, you are at the wrong place.
[I continue to wonder if English is Schaller’s native language.]

Reason Thirteen

You have been treated for many years. You have done IV, you have taken 40 pills per day, you have tried a wide range of specialized treatments, and now you are fed up with it all. You can generally function now at about 75% of your baseline. You are at the end of your treatment rope. This is what happens when someone does not treat you fully and effectively at the beginning of your treatment. You can get treatment fatigue. 

[Hey, maybe they never had Lyme in the first place.]

Reason Fourteen

The treatment approach that leads to cure is not the same dose that leads to stunning organisms. Cure does not does not merely equal fewer bacteria or "a reduction in body load.” For example, using Bicillin once a week with no cyst buster will not kill all your Lyme, nor will it remove cysts. So years after receiving this treatment, your cancer-fighting cells, marked by some as the CD57 level, may be under 90. This is one good test that is quite specific for Lyme disease. (The C3a and C4a test is not specific for Lyme). 

[Did this guy really graduate from an accredited medical school? Did he ever take any courses in microbiology, immunology or cell biology?]

Reason Fifteen

Cynical know-it-alls can castrate the work of Lyme experts and convince patients to drop healthcare workers who are helping. They usually use "the money” argument or "the speed of your recovery" argument to cut you off from someone sincerely trying to help you. Tick and flea-borne infections in the bodies and brains of 
relatives and friends can cause some of them to be outrageously critical, entitled, disrespectful, nasty, insulting, and defamatory, proposing God-like standards to convince you that a person who is helping you should be dropped. 

[It’s pretty obvious where this line of “reasoning” is coming from. He must hear it hourly from his patients and their not so easily duped friends and relatives.]

Reason Sixteen

Two respected scientists, Drs. Sapi and MacDonald, did the first clear work on a Lyme biofilm in early 2008. Organizations with millions in grants and research money have never addressed this issue.
[“Respected by whom?” This is not an issue. Certainly not a clinical issue. B. burgdorferi itself is not even a very good in vitro example of biofilm genetics and metabolism.]

Reason Seventeen

Self-treatment is easy to pursue. Many experts are
expensive, and you are uncertain of their level of knowledge after reading on the Internet.
[Well, if the choice is Schaller or self-medication, I’d have to go with self-medication, followed by a witchdoctor, followed by any other LLMD, followed by whoever is on Oprah this week.]

Reason Eighteen

Tick and flea-borne infections cause isolation. They ruin relationships due to fogginess, poor insight, various addictions, rage, extreme hostility, and refusing to get treatment, and they can sometimes provoke violence.
[And this is one of the reasons that treatment of Lyme infections fails!? Maybe I’ll believe this if some of Schaller’s patients take a baseball bat to him.]

About the Author: 

Dr. Schaller…is one of the most prolific LLMD's in the world. 

[Well, he’s certain one of the most prolific purveyors of grammatical incorrect and incoherent nonsense.]

http://relative-risk.blogspot.com/2009/ ... rning.html
Last edited by LymeH on Thu 8 Apr 2010 23:15, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat 8 Mar 2008 20:14

Re: Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by Fin24 » Thu 8 Apr 2010 7:01

Im confused

you quote relative risk's blog--a well known, extremely biased and possibly IMO unbalanced person--fwiw many think its McSweegan

while some things he has said I find valuable as a mirror to view flaws as outsiders may see them and some of those flaws are unfortunately valid; nonetheless you have to become familiar with whom you quote

BUT you started this post by mentioning Oprah and Dr Oz and even say Dr Oz is from Columbia and claim many LLMDs are as well
Some of the stuff that comes out of Columbia is very 'interesting'. Dr. Oz is from Columbia, as well as many in Lymeland
ummm what???
-what does RR blog that humorously and quite skillfully tears apart Schaller, have to DO with either Oprah or Oz??

and where do you have stats to show ANY majority of Lyme Drs come from or work at Columbia--beyond Fallon??

btw if youre into schaller there are MANY threads re him and his antics here--if you do a search.

Posts: 290
Joined: Mon 1 Mar 2010 16:41

Re: Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by LymeH » Thu 8 Apr 2010 16:47

Dear Fin -

RR mentions Oprah in the article I posted. I said 'many' in Lymeland re: Columbia, not necessarily all MD's.

I don't care who Relative Risk is. I don't care who Schaller is, either. I consider what they 'say'. I have learned the hard way the value of information. I believe it is important for people to consider all possible explanations. I am against the withholding of information. I'm learning that chasing conspirascy theories is a waste of time for me. I've learned that many have greater grammar, spelling, vocabulary, research and other skills than myself. I don't worry too much about those things as long as I get my point across in the most effective and productive manner.

I do not believe in kicking people in the knees to prove a point, although I admit guilt to doing this myself in the past. It is an easy trap to fall into. If someone, anyone, says something I agree with then I may choose to express that agreement. If someone, anyone, says something I disagree with then I may choose to express disagreement. It would be incorrect for anyone to assume any hardfast ties between myself and others simply because I agree with them.

More importantly, I have learned that "I* have everything I need in order to solve my own problems, health or otherwise in *most* circumstances. I believe in empowering the individual and allowing them to make their own decisions.

You seem very intelligent, well-educated and experienced. You seem like you have a lot of things to offer. I am always open to information presented in a non-threatening, non-bashing, informative fashion. I am open to humor and believe using humor as a means of pointing out how riduculos a situation is can be quite effective.

Screw spell and grammar check. It is a beautiful day. The birds are singing and I can hear those waves rolling against the white sands of Maui. They are calling my name and I intend on fostering the most healthy lifestyle I can for myself so that I may actually SEE them one day. To that means, I hope this is the end of this type of email theme that *I* will become involved with.

C'est Tout.

Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat 8 Mar 2008 20:14

Re: Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by Fin24 » Thu 8 Apr 2010 23:09

it seems as if you percieved my questions on this thread as threatening and bashing
I am always open to information presented in a non-threatening, non-bashing, informative fashion.

HOW was my post not so???

I was and am genuinely confused over your connections and so asked--I was neither nasty, knee-bashing or unkind. I also added information about the persons being mentioned to add to YOUR knowledge base about them and to explain why I was asking since i DO know them. That was a polite way to explain why I was asking at all.

as far as your policy of
I don't care who Relative Risk is. I don't care who Schaller is, either. I consider what they 'say'. I have learned the hard way the value of information.
well I have to say, thats odd to me since I have learned that the WHO is often as important as the WHAT--how can you infer meaning/agendas/biases of the content if you have no idea about the person doing the "saying"?? and coming into this with no knowledge of players, or historical events makes one a bit unprepared IMO to make global assumptions.Like who is and is not affiliated with Columbia.or Jemsek Clinic or for that matter the whole Fry conglomerate.

for example if an unbiased researcher reveals persistence of infection vs either an ILADS or IDSA biased one--it may well matter what weight you give the conclusions

perhaps this is one gap of training and experience--Ive been trained to not only vet the author of a study but even the university affiliation AND even the journal--just as we know what sort of biases the New York Times vs the New York Daily News have in contrast when we read current events.

Its sometimes a bit naive to assume that all that matters is whats being said.Thats what happens also when one comes into a conversation without the history or basis for the current conversation!!
I try my best to not make assumptions based upon simple content and instead take things like past comments, and things left UNsaid, and bias into consideration--but thats me-- I tend to think theres a lot more going on than I may be privy to!

Can I please ask: where does it say anywhere in your post about Oprah's connection?? How is anyone (even me) to know that?? it wasnt anywhere ( easily seen) in the quote you excerpted!! and so, it seemd like a non-sequitor and frankly many here dont bother going back to a link to a RR blog without necessity!

silly me thought that if you took the time to cite an excerpt it was related to your statements.hence my confusion, hence my post

and "many in Lymeland" means again whom?? you may or may not have a valid point but I still dont know to whom you refer.

I also ask--you mention in your post to ME below TWICE about grammar and spellcheck--why?? If I recall it is ME being accused of poor punctuation on another thread not the other way round...I like to give others a chance to explain so I dont misunderstand their point, rather than make blind assumptions.what was your point?

you end with this covert admonishment before a haughty dismissal sorta like "that is all"
I hope this is the end of this type of email theme that *I* will become involved with
this type of email theme?
UMMM you stated stuff and made connections I didnt understand, had nothing to do with your own excerpted quote and I asked questions about it--what sort of theme email is this then?? Am I not allowed to ask what your point was and why?--
Last edited by Fin24 on Fri 9 Apr 2010 0:50, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 1716
Joined: Mon 29 Oct 2007 0:55

Re: Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by Cobwebby » Fri 9 Apr 2010 0:26

OOOOOOOO I found Oprah! I found Oprah !!!! I mean OPRAH.
The greater part of our happiness or misery
depends on our dispositions,
and not on our circumstances.
Martha Washington

Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat 8 Mar 2008 20:14

Re: Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by Fin24 » Fri 9 Apr 2010 0:55

YAY , I did too Cobs, after LH EDITED at 22:15 which per your post time stamp--thats when you did too ( but have you found the "many in Lymeland yet attached or affiliated to Columbia"??---other than Fallon and the LDA--me neither!!!")

so basically instead of LH simply stating : Oprah was mentioned in "reason 17" she went on and on about not liking being asked and then went back to enlarge bold and highlite it in RED

ahhh, I see, said the blind man

( edited for grammar and clarity)

Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat 8 Mar 2008 20:14

Re: Dr. Shaller - It's All Relative

Post by Fin24 » Fri 9 Apr 2010 1:09

We can have a contest!!! lets NOW see how many times "Dr Oz" appears in the excerpt and also find all those "many" attached/affiliated to Columbia--Ill donate a box of chocolates for the prize!!

heck Ill even start

1-Brian Fallon MD

2-actress Mary McDonnell
(Oscar-Nominated Actress Mary McDonnell Joins Leading Researchers and Patient Advocates to Announce Nation's First Chronic Lyme Disease Research Center at Columbia University http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-84010875.html)

and lets also list the HORRIBLE stuff coming from there too:
J Neurobiol Dis. 2010 Mar;37(3):534-41. Epub 2009 Nov 26.
Inflammation and central nervous system Lyme disease.
Fallon BA, Levin ES, Schweitzer PJ, Hardesty D.

Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA.

Lyme disease, caused by the bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi, can cause multi-systemic signs and symptoms, including peripheral and central nervous system disease. This review examines the evidence for and mechanisms of inflammation in neurologic Lyme disease, with a specific focus on the central nervous system, drawing upon human studies and controlled research with experimentally infected rhesus monkeys. Directions for future human research are suggested that may help to clarify the role of inflammation as a mediator of the chronic persistent symptoms experienced by some patients despite antibiotic treatment for neurologic Lyme disease.
amf FOR FUN we can also add this
Current Studies ( keeping in mind how USELESS Hysterian thinks they are):

“ IV Ceftriaxone Research Study for Patients with Refractory Psychosis”
Principal Investigator: Brian Fallon, MD
Goals: to determine whether the glutamate modulating effects of intravenous ceftriaxone may reduce psychotic symptoms and test patients with refractory psychosis for tick-related disorders

"Lyme Disease Community Blood Screening Study"
Principal Investigator: Brian Fallon, MD
Goals: To develop a national resource specimen bank for diagnostic test and biomarker development

“Proteomic Studies of CSF of patients with neurologic Lyme disease”
Principal Investigator: Steven Schuzter, MD, UMDNJ
Goals: to identify novel proteins in CSF of Lyme patients

“Brain SPECT Imaging in Chronic Lyme Disease”
Principal Investigator: Brian Fallon, MD
Goals: to determine the clinical usefulness of Brain SPECT imaging when performed for clinical differential diagnosis in a patient with a history of Lyme disease.


Post Reply