Wednesday, March 4, 2009

BC's College vs Cubberley -- Round 2

The gloves are off...

You will recall that in December we told you about MPP Cubberley's feisty letter to the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons -- the original post is linked here. In addition to several important criticisms and strong points raised by Mr. Cubberley, he offered to share with the College several case histories, personal stories of the devastation faced by Lyme patients in BC. The College responded. "The [Executive] Committee has respectfully declined your offer." Pretty much sums it up. We wouldn't want real life medical experience to interfere with medical policy now would we?

Seems the College's response did not sit well with Cubberley, and he was prompted to try once again to get his message across. Here are some highlights from his letter dated March 2nd:

"Your letter did not respond to the substance of mine, and you did not comment on the disparity between your position on Lyme diagnosis and that of the BC CDC and the Ministry of Health. This is a significant problem for patients in BC, because the College's guidelines determine whether and when patients with Lyme are diagnosed and effectively treated. If these guidelines are flawed (as your advice about rash and test indicate they are) many patients will not receive diagnosis and the medically necessary care they're entitled to. If doctors are uninformed about Lyme symptoms, causes, and the unreliability of tests like the ELISA, they are more likely to diagnose Fibromyalgia, MS, CFS or any of a number of other illnesses sharing some symptoms with Lyme. These diagnoses would all miss the opportunity to treat Lyme infection effectively in its early stage when it's most curable."

"I would urge that, in the public interest, the College distance itself from the many scientifically unsupported components of the 2006 IDSA guidelines, and that it mandate made-in-Canada guidelines formulated from fair consideration of all scientific evidence -- including the clinical practice experience of physicians who treat Lyme beyond the existing guidelines."

"In the public interest..." Wow, what a concept! Such an approach could revolutionize medicine as we know it.

For your reading enjoyment, here are links to both the College's letter and Mr. Cubberley's subsequent reply.

Thank you Mr. Cubberley. Here is his email should you wish to send a brief note of encouragement for this excellent work on behalf of the Lyme community.

Have you shared your Lyme experience with your elected representatives yet? Yours might just be the story that gets another politician on our side. We need more brave souls like Mr. Cubberley. Together we're making a difference. Please write today!

No comments:

Post a Comment