The friggin Dr Reeves of the CDC does not believe it

Discussion in 'Fibromyalgia Main Forum' started by hensue, Oct 12, 2009.

  1. hensue

    hensue New Member

    Imagine that he is a DR??? This is what it says part of it in the nytimes. He makes my blood boil
  2. jasminetee

    jasminetee Member

    "The study received a mixed review from Dr. William C. Reeves, who directs public health research on the syndrome at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. He called the research exciting but preliminary, and said he was surprised that a prestigious journal like Science had published it, because the researchers did not state the ages or sex of the patients and controls, or describe the duration of the illness or how it came on.

    “If I don’t know the nature of the cases and controls, I can’t interpret the findings,” Dr. Reeves said.(Says he who changed the definition to include those 3 million depressed people into CFS.)

    “We and others are looking at our own specimens and trying to confirm it,” he said, adding, “If we validate it, great. My expectation is that we will not.”

    He noted that there had been false starts before, including a study in the 1990s linking the syndrome to another retrovirus, which could not be confirmed by later research.

    Many patients and a community of doctors and researchers who specialize in the syndrome take issue with the disease centers’ approach to the illness and the way it defines who is affected. They claim that the C.D.C. includes people whose problems are purely psychiatric, muddying the water and confounding efforts to find a physical cause.

    Frustration with the lack of answers led Annette and Harvey Whittemore, whose 31-year-old daughter has had the syndrome for 20 years, to spend several million dollars to set up a research institute at the University of Nevada in Reno in 2004, and to hire Dr. Mikovits to direct it."

    Can you hear the applause from the CFS/ME & FMS community for the Whittemores and Mikovits? It's deafening. :) It's drowning out Reeves.........

    [This Message was Edited on 10/12/2009]
  3. jasminetee

    jasminetee Member

    Not long ago, the NYT was one of our biggest enemies. I welcome the change.
  4. TeaBisqit

    TeaBisqit Member

    This jerk and my uncle, the doctor, will have no choice but to suck it up soon enough. If it really gets proven that this is THE virus making us sick, I can't wait for the day these jerks have to suck it up.
  5. jasminetee

    jasminetee Member

    I was just thinking of you and your relatives. I'm so happy for you. :) This is what we've been praying for.

    Happy Columbus Day! The day great discoveries were made.

    [This Message was Edited on 10/12/2009]
  6. karynwolfe

    karynwolfe New Member

    Second-ing everyone else's comments!
  7. TeaBisqit

    TeaBisqit Member

    I can't go to them with this news just yet. They are so incredibly evil, the first thing they will say is "How do you know you have it?" and then they will say "How do you know this is what's really making you sick?" I need solid proof. I need something that they cannot step on. So the first step is to get the blood test. But I want to wait for it to be available for my insurance to pay for it. The next step, if I test positive, which I think I will, is for more info to come out proving that This Is It.

    I do want to mention something that hasn't been mentioned yet. Just the oddness or the irony. Michael Jackson's new song came out today called This Is It. Kind of hoping that proves true :D
  8. jasminetee

    jasminetee Member

    I agree with your strategy. You may only have to wait weeks to get a test too. Meanwhile, they will probably hear it on their own which is great. It will make it look like you could really care less what they think! lol... Also, don't forget, even if you were to get cured.. they're still evil. Now you know.

    Wow! That MJ video is perfect timing for today! This is it!

    "I'm looking at the man in the mirror... I'm asking him to change his ways.. and no message could have been any clearer... if you want to make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make that CHANGE!"

  9. TeaBisqit

    TeaBisqit Member

    Just watch him backtrack and try to hold on to his job. He's going to claim that all the people he has personally seen over the years are mental. And then he'll probably squirm around and say that only a "small" percentage of people could possibly be sick from this new virus.

    I wouldn't trust him with any lab tests at all. He's going to lie and deliberately cover up any evidence that ALL the patients he's seen are probably infected.
  10. hensue

    hensue New Member

    Theres has to be a way! Is this big business to him or him just wanting to be right? Or is this really government related? Why is he trying to make sure he is right. Not because he wants to be right. There is money involved I am sure, GREED.

    While people suffer at his hands because he knows all?

    Who is over him?
  11. hensue

    hensue New Member

    He might want to retract some of the things he is saying, he should be squirming not only is he playing against the big boys but also money. Grants and universities they dont give up like people do. He will come down
  12. jasminetee

    jasminetee Member

    I believe Obama appointed Kathleen Sebelius to be the Secretary of the Human Health Services which oversees the CDC. So she's Reeve's boss. She didn't seem to be on our side at the last CFSAC meeting either.

    Who? Who? Who has a vested interest in suppressing the idea of CFS being physical? Good question.

    I agree with you CFS Since and Hensue and lum.[This Message was Edited on 10/12/2009]
  13. spacee

    spacee Member

    The NIH has awarded funds to WPI for research. They seem to really be concerned. They were NOT like this at all in the 1990's and until now.

    Bear with me if you have read this before, but I was studied there for 5 years in the HIV clinic (though HIV neg). It was because my tcount was that of an AIDS patient. Dr. Steven Straus who was over CFS then, requested to see me. Although he was no psychiatrist, he only asked me "psychological" questions. And wrote a letter to my doctors saying that since I had had a panic attack prior to becoming sick, I did not have CFS." I was being seen by Dr. Lapp at the old Cheney Clinic then. I wrote Dr. S. a scathing letter and copied all my docs.

    All that to say. There was definitely a group of docs between the CDC and the NIH that 'agreed' on the mental illness part. At least the NIH seems to be taking the new findings very seriously.

  14. victoria

    victoria New Member

    Pam Weintraub, who writes a blog at Psychology Today, had a good blog about this subject including Dr. Reeves:

    Emerging Diseases
    Patients at the crossroads of new diseases and chronic ills.
    by Pamela Weintraub

    Labeling sick patients psychiatric is medical abuse.
    Over the past year, forces at the highest reaches of medicine have made ever stronger efforts to burden the sick, diseased, and infected with psychiatric labels, consigning them to often mind-numbing psych meds and untreated infection, immune dysfunction, and pain. Some critics see this as psychiatric abuse at the hands of non-psychiatrists --since it is rarely psychiatrists, but rather, those in other specialities who step outside the circle of their training to impose these crude diagnoses on the medically ill....

    rest of the article is at:

    (Pamela Weintraub is a senior editor at Discover Magazine and author of Cure Unknown: Inside the Lyme Epidemic, first place winner of the American Medical Writers Association book award, 2009.)
  15. AuntTammie

    AuntTammie New Member

    Luminescentfeeling and fredt, we have been trying to get rid of Reeves for some time far with no luck, but the CFSAC meeting at the end of this month is one more chance to get our voices heard about him and about several CFS issues...anyone trying to submit anything has to have it in by the 14th or 15th, though, depending on what you are sending (there is more info posted -I think Quay man started that thread)

    as to the CBT GET pseudo studies; apparently, they kept all people with PEM out of those, so obviously they were really ever so accurate (not)

    and as to the study that Reeves said that they were unable to replicate previously, if he is referring to the one that I think he is, their attempts to replicate it failed to use the original protocol, did not last long enough to really learn anything (the scientists doing the study said this when they were told to shut it down), and the samples were contaminated - a real honorable and scientific attempt at replication, huh? not only did that, but they tried to destroy the doctor who did the studies....

    ....despite all these obvious flaws, they published results in 3 medical journals further discrediting CFS patients as not really having physical problems and slamming the doctor who did the original 5 yr study, and then they wrote to her boss, trying to get her fired....and all of this (including the letter to the doctor's boss - at a university, I believe) have been verified - I think it might have been Hillary Johnson that published that info not too long if that is any indication of how they are going to attempt to replicate these findings, that is scary, and somehow they really need to be shut down

    however, that said, fredt, I don't think that taking away govt funding for CFS research overall is the answer (taking it away from the CDC definitely, but not across the board).....the majority of CFS patients are financially far from being capable of donating enough for private funding to really get that far - many of us cannot work and are getting so little income that we are barely even managing the most basic needs, so there is no way we can give no matter how badly we may want to.....I know that some private funding has been raised and that it has been utilized far better than the govt funding, but the amt of private funding has still been quite small compared to what the govt funding has been - so if we could just get the govt to invest the funds outside of the CDC that woudl be great
  16. Elisa

    Elisa Member

    Hi All,

    Reeves own comments will take him down. Any scientist must not bias their test results by saying what the outcome will be. It is considered a bias and a mark of an unskilled and poor researcher.

    His words:

    “We and others are looking at our own specimens and trying to confirm it,” he said, adding, “If we validate it, great. My expectation is that we will not.”

    His words alone could get him fired...because anyone who designs experiments knows that believing in a particular outcome will bias the results and thus is not a valid test/experiment.

    He is really unprofessional...someone will see that soon - regardless of his motivations.

    God Bless,

    [This Message was Edited on 10/12/2009]
  17. AuntTammie

    AuntTammie New Member

    I have to say that if Reeves really believes what he says he does, then he should be willing to do what others have suggested in the past and have some real CFS patient blood transfused into himself...and by real, I mean Canadian definition

    though I do feel quite a bit of animosity towards him, I am not even saying this in a vengeful way - I simply mean that he should put his money where his mouth is - if he is so sure, then prove it
  18. chrissy12

    chrissy12 New Member

    Is there any way to get a copy of the petition signed by over 1600 people and the many writings about CFS/Reeves over to the NY Times? They at least acknowledged some patients and researchers were doubting Reeve's work.

    Maybe, they could be our media source on Reeves. We need it to go bigger, so the powers that be cannot ignore us.
  19. QuayMan

    QuayMan Member

    Probably pretty obvious but there's a direct link to the petition:

    If lots of people post it in comments to articles it might get noticed.

    One can E-mail the NY Times journalist by following the link on the article:
  20. chrissy12

    chrissy12 New Member

    Okay, I like that idea. I just blogged over at the Times about looking at the petition regarding Reeves. It fits in nicely with their paragraph about many patients and researchers doubting Dr. Reeves.

    I think the more that reference it, the better.