Cult-ure

[Guest guest]

I just received the following private message OFF-LIST: "I thought I'd mention that if you search "cult" as Roy said and you look past thefirst page and a half of posts, you'll see that the overwhelming majority of hits concern the words "culture", "cultures"and "cultured"--i.e., the culturing of microbes." This certainly makes sense since our forum's main focus is infectious organisms, how to identify, understand and treat them. penny Penny Houle <pennyhoule@...> wrote: Roy, I don't know what you think we're doing here, but we're not not trying to drum up members. We're very happy with the bright minds we

already have. We've even figured some very interesting things out, if you've been paying attention. This is a place where we can talk frankly about what we want to talk about, mainly infection and inflammation, not exactly the hot topic elsewhere. People are free to join in on the discussions here or not without fear of censorship. We're not a touchy-feely site. There are plenty of those around, all of which have their own share of drama. We're not interested in anything but figuring out how to get everyone well. I talk about a certain subject occasionally when it's being fiercely defended, because someone needs to tell the other side, and I'm the likely candidate considering what I was put through. Other than a tiny few of us, almost everyone else has been intimidated into silence. I saw and experienced things first hand and no

one can claim I didn't. And when I discuss the subject, I'm doing it on my own turf, not coming to yours. By the way, I've been asked to write my story for much bigger outlets by much bigger PWC organizations. No matter how some might want to spin it, apparently a sick patient being sued by a "health provider" is an interesting story and considered very uncool. So far I've declined those groups because I haven't had the desire to deal with the certain blow back I'd be barraged with from certain quarters, but the more misinformation is put out there and rationalized about unproven treatments and the more questionable behavior towards sick people continues, the more I'm seriously tempted to speak out to a larger audience. In the meantime, the very least I can do is make sure people don't forget what happened in the past so people can make reasoned decisions regarding

their future health. What does boggle the mind is why people who don't want to be challenged are going onto pwc sites claiming a cure? Anyone with any sense is going to know that such a claim is going to be vigorously challenged. Now if the challenges had a history of being responded to reasonably, there could be some good discussion and potential for progress, but that's never what happens, is it? Here's something for you to chew on. Back when I was around, anyone (patient or doctor alike) who suggested that more than 3 abx were possibly okay was derided and given the boot for 'not following the protocol'. Now you're saying 5 abx are cool? Same thing happened with other aspects of the program. You don't see a problem with this? I didn't catch it in the beginning but it didn't take long. I was so excited about this revolutionary treatment that I started a

discussion forum (with , who originally told me about it) to raise awareness of its potential. Biggest mistake I ever made because within no time, I was being told to ban members who discussed ANYTHING other than the party line. In the beginning I really urged people to give it the benefit of the doubt especially as there were a few seemingly malicious people who just wanted to attack regardless of any validity the protocol may have had. But as time went by, it became clear that the purpose of my list was to be a propaganda machine, not an honest discussion list open to debate. When I refused to comply I was banished even though I was still being treated and experiencing serious side effects from one of the drugs. A necessary casualty of "war", I guess. So to remedy the problem, I opened another list with a completely new and unrelated name, the first 'Infection & Inflammation'. But

that couldn't be left alone either. was eventually subpoenaed and the new list shut down. Just like that. Fortunately, I won the bigger battle and opened yet another I & I list, but if you can't see problems with all of that, then I'm afraid you have lost all objectivity in this matter. The thing that's truly ironic about this is that I still tried to take a middle ground approach, even after things went south. I still urged people to not take such extreme positions against it. To consider the potential and not throw the baby out with the bathwater. But despite my efforts to be reasonable, I was considered the biggestt threat, not because of my opinions, which certainly weren't as extreme as others', but because of the LIST and its 750+ members. That's what was considered the BIG threat and that's why it got shut down and why I ended up in court. It was posts from various

members on the list that were attempted to be introduced as evidence in court. Without the pending lawsuit, would never have gone along with the petition to close the list. Fortunately, there are other big groups, like Lyme net, which are private and can't be shut down the way a list can. So I'm all for people speaking out on those lists that have some protection from that kind of intimidation. And I relish people being able to speak in any way they want on THIS list, after having my own freedom of speech attacked. Fortunately, from what I understand, it won't be long before the Supreme Court is deciding whether freedom of speech can be so easily subjugated by big internet providers like . The good news now for anyone who does want to speak up about their story but has been intimidated with legal threats, they no longer have

to be so afraid. There's a very competent attorney in the plaintiff's home town. Anyone can contact me for this attorney's name. Even if you're as sick as I was at the time, you can be represented and don't need to be present. He knows how to handle this kind of legal manipulation. First off, having already lost a similar suit, and with a history of similar suits filed by the plaintiff in the past, it's unlikely a judge would be sympathetic to yet another suit. But IF a suit is filed and this attorney is called upon again, he's prepared to go to the next level with a specific kind of countersuit in which the financial burden will no longer be on the defendant/s, but on the plaintiff. penny p.s. Also, Roy. If you're concerned about name calling, you should be more carefull with your accusations. I don't recall calling anyone a "cult member" lately, although the topic

on the definition of "cult member" has come up more than once. If I ever did characterize someone that way, it was a long time ago and in private which makes me think you've been listening to tales and not getting all the facts straight. On these lists I've tried to take the middle road EXCEPT when the view being presented is so one-sided that the other side has to be presented for balance. Yes, I do share my own story and don't withhold my opinions. But I don't attack sick people just because they don't agree with me. My intention is to help sick people and protect them from harm. Why there's so often such a personal and over reaction to criticism regarding this protocol is beyond me. For some reason, most legitimate protocols and researchers seem to be able to handle criticism. They just roll with it and carry on. They don't respond with censorship and lawsuits. So why continue to put something out

there in the public eye if you don't want it to be scrutinized? Does the need for attention outweigh the natural repercussions?