Thursday, April 30, 2009

CT Lyme bill passes with unanimous approval!

The Connecticut Lyme bill received unanimous approval in that State's House of Representatives today. The bill is designed to protect doctors who treat Lyme disease and, in particular, Chronic Lyme disease. Introduced by State Representatives Kimberly Fawcett and Jason Bartlett, the bill also received unanimous support from the State's Joint Committee on Public Health in an earlier vote.

The bill has the support of the Connecticut State Medical Society, although not from its Department of Public Health.

Today's vote in the House of Representatives brings the bill one important step closer to becoming law. It is a shame that medical systems should become so broken that legislative solutions would seem to be the most efficient way of addressing such issues -- perhaps this is what is needed in Canada. Connecticut may soon join the ranks of New York and Rhode Island, which already have Lyme doctor protection laws in place. The bill now moves on to the Senate.

"I had no idea what last July was going to present to me when my husband was diagnosed with a life threatening case of Lyme disease," said Rep. Fawcett.

State Representative Jason Bartlett has made this his cause because his mother has Chronic Lyme disease.

For the full story, see this article on News Channel 8, Below is a video report from News Channel 8 as well.

Here is another well-written piece from The Connecticut Post. "[The bill] comes down on the side of people who suffer from Lyme in this big debate," said state Rep. William Tong, D-Stamford, a bill co-sponsor. "It says the scientific community can have that debate, but we're not going to let anybody else go without treatment."

Debate: Now there is a concept to contemplate; not medical Colleges shutting down doctors who are trying to help those suffering from Chronic Lyme disease; not the IDSA summarily ignoring the more than 19,000 articles in medical literature that demonstrate the persistence of Chronic Lyme infections; not Health Canada revising Canada's Lyme disease guidelines without the highly qualified leadership of the Canadian Lyme Disease Foundation; not Health Canada sticking by Lyme tests and a National Case Definition that have been shown to be seriously flawed. Medical progress should not be defined by what big pharmaceutical dollars call progress. The medical community needs to get to a place where it can have a meaningful conversation about emerging medicine and competing ideas.

Monday, April 6, 2009

Lyme Research in Canada!

The first-of-its-kind independent Lyme research facility opened its doors amidst great anticipation at the Columbia University Medical Center in northern Manhattan, NY, back in early 2007. Columbia's Lyme and Tick-Borne Diseases Research Center was established as "the first academic research center in the [United States] to focus multidisciplinary research on Chronic Lyme disease", under the direction of the highly respected Brian Fallon, MD, MPH. The Center's website includes information on their latest research and extensive patient resources.

Yesterday the official opening of the Dr. E. Murakami Centre for Lyme Research, Education & Assistance Society was announced on CanLyme. Hat's off to Dr. Murakami. Considered by many to be Canada's foremost Lyme doctor (he has taken more than 20 Chronic Lyme patients out of "permanent" wheelchairs!), he is no stranger to the Lyme controversy -- see Dr. Ernie Murakami, MD on CBC Television.

The full announcement about the new research centre follows:

It is with great excitement that we announce the official opening of the Dr. E. Murakami Centre for Lyme
Research, Education & Assistance Society. It is Dr. Murakami's life work to make a difference for those suffering with Lyme. Up until now, Dr. Murakami has been fighting this fight as a lone doctor. Now he has a Society to fall back on, representative of all he believes in. He is the founder and president of this society. This will now be his lasting legacy.

The Society is registered with the Government of Canada as a Not-for-profit Society. It is currently run by a board of nine directors. There is a good line up of experiences within the board members to assist in achieving the goals of the Society. As the Society is a not-for-profit organization, it relies heavily on donations, grants and outside funding. The society website has been set up to accept donations from anyone interested. Memberships are also available, for those who are able, which will allow them to be part of the Society and assist with fundraising activities and efforts.

Up until now, Dr. Murakami has been funding his efforts on his own. As all of you know, he does all of his communications with sufferers au gratis. We hope you will join the official Society of Dr. M in some way, shape or form that suits you best. The first priorities of the Society is to advance the research efforts as quickly as possible. There is a plethora of information and data that has been gathered from patients just like you. This information and the work of cooperative laboratories will fuel the truth forward.

We are looking forward to a positive future and some exponential changes for those with Lyme and co-infections. Please visit the Society website and bookmark it. We hope you will be able to help out anyway you can.

Any questions or problems with the site, please contact me directly at

Sincerely yours,
Melanie Lauren
Forum Admin
Marketing, Media and Fundraising Director
Dr. E. Murakami Centre for Lyme

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Update on CT Lyme bill

Here is an update on the Connecticut Lyme Bill we told you about in February (see The poli-ticks of Lyme), where State Representatives Kim Fawcett and Jason Bartlett introduced a bill to protect Connecticut Lyme physicians.

Fawcett, whose husband battled to get treatment for Lyme disease last year, had this to say: "[A perception] that a lot of doctors out there maybe just think, Lyme Disease, I don't want to get involved in it. So what they do is deflect to their patients, 'I can't really treat you here, you have to find a specialist.' Our legislation doesn't say what they do. It just gives them the freedom to diagnose clinically and treat how they see fit."

This clip is from News Channel 8, as posted on