Dr Jones

[artur737]

Decyzja w jego sprawie ma byc oznajmiona 18 grudnia.
Jak pisalem poprzednio, komisja nie zaleca odebrania mu licencji, ale wyznacza
okres probny na dwa lata, w tym czasie wyznacza nadzor innego lekarza nad
praca Dr Jones (oplacany z jego kieszeni) i kare 10000$.
Najgrozniejszy w tym wszystkim jest ten nadzor poniewaz komisja umiescila
gdzies stypulacje, ze wszelka diagnoza boreliozy musi byc poparta pozytywnymi
testami, ktorych jak wiadomo czesc chorych nie moze uzyskac.

Oznajmienie decyzji ma charakterer publiczny wiec spodziewa sie, ze dziesiatki
lub setki chorych z borelioza pojawia sie na ogloszeniu wyroku w celu
manifestacji swojego poparcia dla Dr Jonesa.

[484848a]

Artur,widzę, że jesteś na bieżąco więc daj znać jak tylko coś się
wyjaśni. Od kilku tygodni próbuję się z nim bezskutecznie
skontaktować, ale on pewnie nie ma teraz głowy do czytania maili od
spanikowanej matki z Polski. Poza tym wszystko jest uzależnione od
tej decyzji, więc trudno mu w tej chwili cokolwiek obiecywać.

[artur737]

Moze w koncu odpowie. Ale wiem, ze w zwiazku z tym, ze groza mu kolejne
oskarzenia i procesy to byc moze doradzono mu aby sie nie udzielal nadmiernie
przez telefon i email.

[artur737]

Dzisiaj ma byc decyzja, ale jeszcze nie ma.

[484848a]

Pamiętam i trzymam kciki za niego z całej siły.

[artur737]

Zatwierdzili jednoglosnie mniej wiecej to co zaproponowala komisja czyli $10000
kary, dwa lata okres probny z nadzorem innego lekarza (na koszt wlasny Jonesa),
ktory ma wyrywkowo kontrolowac historie chorob leczonych przez Jones'a pacjentow.

Jones zapowiada, ze bedzie sie odwolywac i jak trzeba to pojdzie do wyzszych wladz.


December 18, 2007

Medical board approves probation, fine for controversial doctor


HARTFORD, Conn. - A medical examining board has unanimously approved two years
probation and a $10,000 fine for a New Haven-area pediatrician whose treatment
of Lyme disease has been called into question.

The Connecticut Medical Examining Board also voted to require another doctor to
randomly review Dr. Charles Ray Jones' patient records.

Jones says he plans to appeal, first to the board and then in Hartford Superior
Court.

The board upheld state Department of Public Health allegations that Jones
diagnosed Lyme disease in two Nevada children and prescribed antibiotics for
them in 2004 and 2005 before ever examining them. He disputes that.

Jones has drawn support from across the country because he has ignored consensus
treatment guidelines for Lyme disease and prescribed antibiotics to children
with the ailment.

[artur737]

Nie wiem czy to przypadek (ale jak znam zycie to bylo to celowe, ktos u wladzy
wyraznie sympatyzuje z Jonesem) rowniez dzisiaj odbywa sie spotkanie wladz
Connecticut z wyborcami w sprawie Boreliozy i dostepu do lekarzy LLMD.

Zaloze sie, ze wyrok na Jonesa jest tam mocno dyskutowany.

[artur737]

Tracy z Lymenetu pisze, ze ...
Some very strange things happened today; and I am not able to post them for fear
of giving the play book to the other team; but something new happened today, and
Dr. Jone's attorney said it could "blow this whole thing out of the water."

Sorry to be so mysterious, but just want to let you know there is hope for an
appeal based on new information.....

Jakkolwiek Tracy nie moze tego napisac publicznie na forum to twierdzi, ze
dzisiaj pojawil sie nowy fakt w sprawie dr Jonesa, ktory wg jego prawnika
stanowi doskonala podstawe dla wniesienia apelacji i nieomal gwarantuje zwyciestwo.

[artur737]

Tu jest jeszcze taki dluzszy artykul na temat dzisiejszych wydarzen
tinyurl.com/2q6veu
Medical board approves probation, fine for controversial doctor

By DAVE COLLINS

Associated Press Writer

8:17 PM EST, December 18, 2007

HARTFORD, Conn.

A New Haven pediatrician who has been praised by patients but criticized by the
medical establishment for the way he treats Lyme disease was reprimanded, fined
$10,000 and placed on two years probation by state regulators Tuesday.

The Connecticut Medical Examining Board voted unanimously to impose the
sanctions after concluding that Dr. Charles Ray Jones violated care standards by
diagnosing Lyme disease in a boy and his sister and prescribing antibiotics
based on a phone conversation with their mother, months before he examined them
in May 2004.

The board also found that Jones broke standards by failing to reconsider his
diagnoses of the children after lab tests came up negative for the tick-borne
disease, which can cause painful arthritis, meningitis and other serious
illnesses if not treated promptly.

Board members further concluded that Jones was wrong to prescribe antibiotics
for nearly a year without repeat exams and without any arrangement with another
doctor, because the children lived in Nevada, to monitor for any side effects of
long-term antibiotic therapy.

Hartford lawyer Elliott Pollack, who is representing the 77-year-old Jones, said
he will appeal the board's decision.

"This board has made a very serious error without sufficient evidence and
contrary to compelling evidence," Pollack said, adding that the board's ruling
was "a classic example of government treading where it's not ready to tread."

He said the board's decision would cause a "chilling effect," because many
doctors will now be worried about regulators questioning the way they treat
their patients.

Pollack compared Jones with the many "nonconformists" who were ostracized by the
medical community before having their innovations validated.

Jones, who says he has treated more than 10,000 children with Lyme disease,
insists long-term courses of antibiotics are the best remedy.

He also believes many doctors fail to diagnose Lyme disease when their patients
actually have it, because their patients don't have what the medical
establishment says are the telltale symptoms, including a rash and achy joints.
Jones says less than 10 percent of Lyme patients actually have the rash when
they go to the doctor.

The misdiagnoses are causing unnecessary suffering, Jones and his supporters
contend.

But two major medical associations released guidelines in the past year that
found no good evidence that long-term antibiotics help lingering symptoms. They
also warned that serious side effects and formation of drug-resistant super
germs can result from long-term use of antibiotics.

Another problem is no test can confirm whether someone has active Lyme disease.
The main tests used are ones that confirm the presence of infection-fighting
antibodies, which often take weeks to form but linger long after Lyme is gone.

Jones says many tests are unreliable and too many doctors stop considering Lyme
disease diagnoses if tests come back negative.

At a hearing at the state Legislative Office Building on Tuesday, Pollack told
the Medical Examining Board that Jones did not formally diagnose or treat the
Nevada children until after he examined them.

He said the children, who were not named, are now doing well.

"When is the last time this board punished a physician for curing patients?"
Pollack asked the board.

Dr. David Goldenberg, a member of the Medical Examining Board, strongly took
issue with many of Pollack's contentions.

"Your argument has more holes in it than a watering can," Goldenberg said.

Goldenberg said the board was not trying to set new standards for treating Lyme
disease.

"It's obvious to me that the standard of care was breached not one, but many
times _ the old standard of care," he said.

As to Pollack comparing Jones to the "nonconformists," Goldenberg said history
is probably filled with thousands of doctors who were wrong and mistreated their
patients with experimental care.

The board voted shortly after Goldenberg's remarks. After the hearing, Jones'
patients and his supporters expressed their anger.

"I wouldn't be here right now if he hadn't been here to help me," said Meredith
Lyon, 18, of Wenham, Mass. "I think what happened today is absolutely criminal."

Lyon said she began seeing Jones when she was 8 or 9 years old, and nearly all
her Lyme disease symptoms are gone. Her mother, Kay Lyon, said other
pediatricians failed to diagnose the disease and told her Meredith would die
because of brain lesions.

Before seeing Jones, Meredith missed school and spent time in a psychiatric
hospital because of hallucinations and suicidal thoughts, Kay Lyon said.

Jones said that despite his age, he keeps a full-time practice in New Haven
focusing on Lyme disease.

"If I don't do it, who will?" he said.

He said he was "not happy" with the examining board's decision, which also
requires him to hire another doctor to review his patient files.

"It's not over by any means," Jones said. "This is going to be challenged."

[artur737]

W tym artykule prawnik zapowiada apelacje twierdzac, ze komisja podjela decyzje
bez solidnego poparcia dowodowego dla swojej opinii oraz w obecnosci niezbitych
dowodow swiadczacych cos wrecz przeciwnego.

[artur737]

Tu jest raport ze spotkaniem z przedstawicielami rzadu tego samego dnia. Jones
rzeczywiscie byl tam wspominany.
Ale nie wynika by z tego cos natychmiast wyniknelo. Kazdy (ILADS, Wormser)
przedstawil swoj punkt widzenia i tyle.

By Natasha Lee
Staff Writer

December 19, 2007

HARTFORD - Doctors and health advocates urged legislators yesterday to improve
and protect access to treatment for people with chronic Lyme disease.

Advocates say only a small number of physicians are treating long-term effects
of the tick-borne illness because such therapies are not accepted by the
mainstream medical community, which says there are no proven benefits.

Long-term antibiotic treatment lowers the chance of misdiagnosis and increases
the quality of life for patients with the disease, Dr. Daniel Cameron said at a
breakfast forum hosted by state Rep. Jason Bartlett, D-Danbury, who has pushed
for legislation to improve Lyme disease reporting to the state Department of
Public Health.

"There's this view that there's no such thing as chronic Lyme and that it's
nothing more than the aches and pains of daily living," said Cameron, president
of the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society, a nonprofit group
focused on advancing treatment. He also runs a practice in Westchester County, N.Y.

Advocates yesterday morning asked legislators to push for protection of doctors
who treat chronic Lyme. Cameron said the controversy has prompted some
physicians to shy away from progressive treatments for fear their licenses could
be revoked.

"(The) patient really loses if doctors are always looking over their shoulder to
see if the state is watching," he said.

Elizabeth White, a retired nurse practitioner from Trumbull, has suffered from
babesiosis and bartonella - both tick-borne illnesses - for nine years, and said
if she hadn't sought alternative intravenous therapy, she would have died.

"This is a devastating disease, especially for people who can't find a
Lyme-literate doctor," she said.

The state reported more than 1,700 cases of Lyme last year.

Cameron said treatment should be determined by physicians experienced in Lyme
disease and not by conventional guidelines that recommend only a 30-day
antibiotic treatment.

Lyme can cause severe joint pain, fatigue, temporary paralysis, depression,
irregular heart beat and dementia.

"Patients need to be able to choose their options of treatment, and we need
freedom to use our own judgments as doctors," Cameron said.

A majority of physicians, however, use guidelines recommended by the Infectious
Disease Society of America that say Lyme disease can be treated and cured within
two to three weeks.

"There is no data to suggest otherwise and this has been looked at," Dr. Gary
Wormser, said in a telephone interview. Wormser is a doctor with the New York
Medical College in Valhalla, N.Y., and is a spokesman for the infectious disease
society.

The society said the disease can be easily diagnosed by the presence of a
bull's-eye rash or a positive blood test.

Wormser said studies over the last five years show ongoing intravenous treatment
can lead to complications or create drug-resistant superbugs that are difficult
to treat.

"The side effects outweigh the benefits," he said.

But Lyme advocates like Pat Smith, president of the Lyme Disease Association in
New Jersey, said at the forum yesterday that current testing methods are
unreliable. Smith said Lyme symptoms are often mistreated because they can mimic
those of neurological disorders such as multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease
and chronic fatigue.

She cited a recent Johns Hopkins study that reported only 25 percent of positive
cases of Lyme are identified by a blood test; and a rash may occur only 50
percent to 60 percent of the time.

As controversy surrounding treatment grows, patients are shortchanged, Smith said.

"We can't let patients be in limbo while these discussions are being held," she
said. "We need to address these issues now."

The debate is fueled by the case of a New Haven doctor whose treatment of Lyme
disease in two Nevada children in 2004 and 2005 was called into question by the
state Department of Public Health.

The state Medical Examining Board yesterday gave Dr. Charles Ray Jones two years
of probation and a $10,000 fine for diagnosing the children with Lyme disease
and treating them with antibiotics before examining them.

Jones disputed that, and said he planned to appeal the decision. Jones has drawn
support from across the country because he has ignored consensus treatment
guidelines for Lyme disease and prescribed antibiotics to children with the ailment.

Wormser said physicians frequently overdiagnose Lyme disease.

"What's alarming to me is that they diagnose people of having a disease they
don't have at all and recommended long-term antibiotics," he said.

Georgina Scholl, research chairwoman of the Fairfield County Municipal Deer
Management Alliance who attended the forum, said she wasn't qualified to comment
on treatment. Stamford, Norwalk and Greenwich are members of the alliance.

Scholl instead emphasized prevention as the key to decreasing the disease.

"Treatment doesn't give you immunity and protection. Let's focus on prevention,"
she said.

- The Associated Press contributed to this story.

[artur737]

www.ctn.state.ct.us/ondemand.asp?byDate=12/18/2007
W tym linku powyzej mozna obejrzec za darmo caly sad nad biednym Dr Jonesem.
Trwa to cos okolo 2 godzin.
Pierwsze 20 min to nudne sprawy proceduralne i mozna pominac.

Trzeba uzyc Media Player.

Obejrzalem, ale nie umiem tego sciagnac ani wypalic. A nie mialbym nic przeciwko
temu by to zatrzymac jako dokument historyczny. Moze kiedys sie przyda.

Jak ktos wie jak to wypalic na plytce to niech napisze (oczywiscie bez placenia
im $30)

[hopekk]

Sciagniecie tego filmu to nie jest prosta sprawa. Maja dosyc dobe zabezpieczenia (po to aby placic). Mam program, ktory jest drozszy niz sciagniecie tego filmu wiec polecic go nie moge. Ja za pomoca tego programu sciagnalem film na dysk i chetnie bym sie podzielil, lez moj internet podczas wysylania duzych plikow (170 mb) nie jest zbyt sprawny. Arturze wyjscia sa dwa albo poczekasz i kiedys w nocy uda mi sie gdzies go wrzucic na serwer albo wysle Ci poczta na adres domowy.
ps.
Chyba chodzi o ten film: "Concerning discipline of Hamden pediatrician and Lyme Doctor Charles R. Jones" prawda? Bo ten sciaglem jak narazie.

[artur737]

A nie mozesz podzielic tego na dwe czesci np rarem i wsadzic na rapidshare.
Rapidshare bierze pliki do 99 Mb kazdy. Bo calosc to chyba nieco ponizej 200 Mb

[pedro_x]

Plik mozna sciagnac z ponizszych linkow

www.filefactory.com/file/40d95d/

lub rapidshare, plik podzielony na dwa party

Lyme1.ciah.pl
Lyme2.ciah.pl

Wszystko od poczatku

[artur737]

bo dzisiaj Dr Jones poprosil o ponowne otwarcie i ponowne rozpatrzenie sprawy.

Wyszlo na jaw, ze rodzice jednego z dzieci z borelioza, ktore zostaly
skonsultowane przez czlonka komisji lekarskiej Dr Senechala uslyszeli od niego,
ze borelioza nie istnieje i ze to wszystko oszustwo itd.

Postawa do ponownego rozpatrzenia sprawy jest powazna stronniczosc Dr Sehechala
jezeli chodzi o borelioze a jednak bioracego udzial w ustalaniu niby
'bezstronnego' werdyktu nad dr Jonesem.

[484848a]

Dobrze, że nie bali się mówić. To znaczy pewnie się trochę
bali,skoro sprawa wyszła dopiero teraz. Ale może ktoś ich przekonał,
że jak załatwią Jonesa, to już nikt im dziecka nie wyleczy. Dobra
wiadomość. Dzięki, Artur.

[artur737]

Z tego co wiem, to bylo to wiadome dla Dr Jonesa i jego prawnika juz w dniu
ustalania wyroku.

Ale prawdopodobnie wtedy jeszcze prawnik nie przeprowadzil decydujacej rozmowy z
tymi rodzicami by uzyskac pewnosc, ze sa dostatecznie dobrymi swiadkami. Stad ta
sprawa wyniknela dopiero teraz.

[artur737]

CALDA opisala to tak:

The basis for the motion is bias on the part of one of the panel
members, Dr. Senechal, who had told the parents of a child diagnosed
with chronic Lyme disease during the Jones hearings that there was no
such thing as chronic Lyme disease, that the treatment of chronic Lyme disease
was a “big racket,” and referred to physicians who treat chronic Lyme disease as
“quacks” who were “in cahoots” with lab companies. The motion argues that this
profound bias prevented Dr. Senechal from having the necessary impartiality to
provide Dr. Jones a fair trial in a fair tribunal, a fundamental underpinning of
due process under the constitution.

Due process requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases.
Two parents who attended the December 18th hearing stepped forward at
its conclusion to express their concerns that a physician with such
strong bias had been included on the panel. The parents had learned of Dr.
Senechal’s bias through personal encounters with him as a physician of their
child, who had been diagnosed with chronic Lyme disease. The information came to
light at the end of the December 18th hearing, when the two parents first
approached counsel for Dr. Jones. The parents had not met Dr. Jones nor his
counsel prior to the conclusion of the December 18th hearing.

[artur737]

Wynika z tego opisu, ze ci rodzice po prostu przybyli na proces aby go zobaczyc.
Ich dziecko nigdy wczesnie nie spotkalo ani nie bylo leczone przez Dr Jonesa.

W trakcie procesu rozpoznali jednego z lekarzy jako tego, ktory wczesnie zle sie
wyrazal o lekarzach leczacych borelioze.
Wtedy zdecydowali sie podejsc do Dr Jonesa i zaoferowac swoja pomoc w formie
swiadczenia o stronniczosci czlonka komisji.

[artur737]

Dzisiaj wniosek o ponowne otwarcie sprawy zostal odrzucony.
So jeszcze wyzsze instancje, wiec decyzja byc moze nie jest ostateczna.

[stachenka]

[484848a]

Artur, dzięki za błyskawiczne wieści.Szkoda, że człowiek w jego
wieku musi szrpać się z łowcami "czarownic", zamiast zajmować się
tym, co potrafi najlepiej.Traci czas, a mógłby go poświęcić kolejnym
dzieciom, którym inni lekarze nie dają szansy na powrót do zdrowia.

[grizac]

Składam obywatelski donos na dr W.D. -diagnozuje i leczy na odległość

sport.onet.pl/0,1248750,1672529,wiadomosc.html

[zazule]

i widzisz co sie stało - szalik trzyma na odwrotnie

[grizac]

Dobrze trzyma ten szalik!
Przecież to Nowa Zelandia, więc jak patrzymy z naszej półkuli, to dobrze trzyma

[zazule]

Patrzę przez okno i widzę, że faktycznie dobrze trzyma

[dartom.www]

a czy ja mogę lekarzom ze Szpitala Wojewódzkiego w Olsztynie założyć
sprawę za nieprawdiłowe rozponanie neuroboreliozy (mimo dodatniego
testu Elisa) i tym samym opóźnienie leczenia o kilka dobrych (złych)
miesięcy?? Konowały powinni mi za to zapłacić!

[mysza323]

A ja mimo dodatniej Elisy w ogóle nie zostałam przyjęta do szpitala ....... bo
........ nie miałam rumienia !!!!!! I odmowę mam na piśmie z uzasadnieniem!
Zażądałam tego dla lekarza rodzinnego, który wystawił skierowanie do szpitala.