Division of Pediatric and Congenital Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care. Electronic address: zbeckerman@austin.utexas.edu.
2
Tecnologico de Monterrey, Escuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud, Monterrey, Mexico; Division of Pediatric and Congenital Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care.
3
Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Dell Medical School, Dell Children’s Medical Center, Austin, Texas.
4
Division of Pediatric and Congenital Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care; Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Dell Medical School, Dell Children’s Medical Center, Austin, Texas.
Abstract
Bartonella endocarditis can be a very elusive diagnosis. The clinical manifestations can vary and, at times, include multiorgan involvement. This case report describes two patients presenting with multiorgan failure, cerebral mycotic aneurysms and valvular endocarditis secondary to Bartonella infection. The complex diagnosis, decision making, and surgical management are described.
________________
**Comment**
It’s unfortunate that once again the study authors choose the word “rare” regarding Bartonella and/or any tick-borne infection manifestations, as even the most hardened critics admit these pathogens are prevalent and can have highly variable presentations. It would have been much more appropriate that the authors would state it’s the first time these particular findings have been published rather than give people the impression something occurs rarely.
Again, please keep in mind that current 2-tiered CDC testing is based on blood tests that misses half of all cases and do not look for the organism but the body’s immune response (antibodies): https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/12/16/laboratory-testing-for-lyme-disease/ Current CDC guidelines were created for surveillance purposes only but are being used diagnostically. All patients should be informed that they can still be infected despite a negative test.
There are going to be patients with heart symptoms that have an underlying tick-borne illness but test negatively (seronegative). These people are falling through the cracks of the medical symptom yet could be greatly helped with appropriate antimicrobial treatment. If you suspect you are one of these people or suspect others, please give the validated Horowitz questionnaire to them to take to their practitioner: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/09/05/empirical-validation-of-the-horowitz-questionnaire-for-suspected-lyme-disease/ It also takes an open mind and trained eye to diagnose these patients, and it can be Lyme, Baronella, or any one of many pathogens transmitted by ticks: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/08/22/early-diagnosis-necessitates-lyme-savvy-doctors/ I hope doctors are waking up to the growing need for education regarding the growing link between tick-borne illness and heart issues.
Breaking News: Dr Tim Ball Defeats Michael Mann’s Climate Lawsuit!
Published on
Written by John O’Sullivan
Supreme Court of British Columbia dismisses Dr Michael Mann’s defamation lawsuit versus Canadian skeptic climatologist, Dr Tim Ball. Full legal costs are awarded to Dr Ball, the defendant in the case.
The Canadian court issued it’s final ruling in favor of the Dismissal motion that was filed in May 2019 by Dr Tim Ball’s libel lawyers.
The plaintiff Mann’s “hockey stick” graph, first published in 1998, was featured prominently in the U.N. 2001 climate report. The graph showed an “unprecedented” spike in global average temperature in the 20th Century after about 500 years of stability.
Skeptics have long claimed Mann’s graph was fraudulent.
On Friday morning (August 23, 2019) Dr Ball sent an email to WUWT revealing:
“Michael Mann’s Case Against Me Was Dismissed This Morning By The BC Supreme Court And They Awarded Me [Court] Costs.”
A more detailed public statement from the world-renowned skeptical climatologist is expected in due course.
Professor Mann is a climate professor at Penn State University. Mann filed his action on March 25, 2011 for Ball’s allegedly libelous statement that Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn State.” The final court ruling, in effect, vindicates Ball’s criticisms.
Previously, on Feb, 03, 2010, a self-serving and superficial academic ‘investigation‘ by Pennsylvania State University had cleared Mann of misconduct. Mann also falsely claimed the NAS found nothing untoward with his work.
But the burden of proof in a court of law is objectively higher.
Not only did the B.C. Supreme Court grant Ball’s application for dismissal of the 8-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit, it also took the additional step of awarding full legal costs to Ball.
This extraordinary outcome will likely trigger severe legal repercussions for Dr Mann in the U.S. and may prove fatal to alarmist climate science claims that modern temperatures are “unprecedented.”
According to the leftist The Guardian newspaper (Feb, 09, 2010), the wider importance of Mann’s graph over the last 20 years is massive:
“Although it was intended as an icon of global warming, the hockey stick has become something else – a symbol of the conflict between mainstream climate scientists and their critics.”
Under court rules, Mann’s legal team have up to 30 days to file an appeal. For readers interested in accessing the court website directly, use this link.
‘Hockey Stick’ Discredited by Statisticians in 2003
In 2003 a Canadian study showed the “hockey stick” curve “is primarily an artefact of poor data handling, obsolete data and incorrect calculation of principal components.” When the data was corrected it showed a warm period in the 15th Century that exceeded the warmth of the 20th Century.
So, the graph was junk science. You could put baseball scores into Mann’s Climate Model and it would create the Hockey Stick.
But the big question then became: did Mann intentionally falsify his graph from motivation to make profit and/or cause harm (i.e. commit the five elements of criminal fraud)?
No one could answer that question unless Mann surrendered his numbers. He was never going to do that voluntarily – or face severe consequences for not doing so – that is, until Dr Ball came into the picture!
Evidence in Legal Discovery and the Truth Defense
Dr Ball’s legal team adroitly pursued the ‘truth defense’ such that the case boiled down to whether Ball’s words (“belongs in the state pen, not Penn State”) after examining the key evidence (Mann’s R2 regression numbers) fairly and accurately portrayed Mann.
The aim was to compel the plaintiff (Dr. Mann) to show his math ‘working out’ to check if he knowingly and criminally misrepresented his claims by resorting to statistical fakery (see: ‘Mike’s trick‘ below).
In the pre-trial Discovery Process the parties are required to surrender the cited key evidence in reasonable fashion, that they believe proves or disproves the Claim.
Despite Ball’s best efforts over 8 years, Mann would not agree to surrender to an open court his math ‘working out’ – those arcane R2 regression numbers for his graph (see Mann’s latest obfuscating Tweet in the ‘update’ at foot of this article).
But throughout 2017 and 2018 any reasonable observer could see through such endless delays from the plaintiff – all just attritional tactics.
The Penn State professor had persistently refused to honor the binding “concessions” agreement he made to Ball which ultimately gave his legal team the coup de graceto win the case for the defendant due to Mann’s ‘Bad Faith’ (see: legal definition here).
Dr. Ball always argued that those numbers, if examined in open court, would have conclusively proved Mann was motivated to commit a criminal fraud. It was at this point legal minds could discern Ball was closing in on victory – a triumph for ‘David over Goliath.’
And Mann certainly is a science ‘Goliath.’ Ever since featuring so famously in the UN IPCC 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR) Mann’s graph has been an iconic image cited relentlessly by environmentalists clamoring for urgent action on man-made global warming.
For the past two decades the biased mainstream media has acclaimed Mann as “a world-leading climate scientist” and last year he was heralded as their champion to help dethrone “climate denier” President Trump.
Indeed, not just a fawning MSM, but many hundreds of subsequent climate studies have relied on Mann’s findings. Mann’s reputation was such, that most climate researchers merely accepted his graph, a typical example of groupthink.
Dr Ball has long warned that if the world was permitted to see behind the secrecy they would be shocked at just how corrupt and self-serving are those ‘scientists’ at the forefront of man-made global warming propaganda.
As anyone can tell by contrasting and comparing the graphs below (Mann’s version top, Ball’s below) it is obvious there exists a massive discrepancy in the respective findings.
Above: contrast and compare Dr Mann’s dodgy graph with Dr Ball’s more reliable version (based on that of the renowned H. H. Lamb) and see how Mann fraudulently altered the proxy climate date with a ‘hockey stick’ shape to falsely show the dramatic uptick with modern temperatures rising ‘catastrophically’ to fit the fake UN IPCC doomsaying narrative.
Have Skeptics Ever Proven that Mann’s Graph was Deliberately Faked?
Answer: No. This is because Mann has always refused to release his R2 regression numbers for independent examination.
He claimed his secrecy was justified because he held “proprietary rights” over them (i.e. personally valuable intellectual work product, you see). So “valuable” to Mann was the secrecy of his metadata that losing a multi-million dollar lawsuit and his reputation was the ultimate price he was prepared to pay.
While steep, I guess, that’s preferable to serving a long federal prison stretch, right?
Before Ball’s glorious court victory, little more could be conclusively proven other than the hockey stick graph uptick stupidly (and unscientifically) relies on the proxy evidence from the tree rings of a single Yamal larch!
Mann could thus sleep safe in the knowledge that as long as statistical experts remain deprived of any conclusive proof of his intent to defraud, they could only find him guilty of incompetence.
Putting Mann’s Fraudulent Graph Under the Microscope
For an easy-viewing summary by Tim Ball please watch the video:
Mann’s goal was to make the Little Ice Age (LIA) disappear, as we explained in our previous article on this issue. The LIA was an especially cold era that ended around 1840 and since then global temperatures have gradually risen. But government ‘experts’ like Mann have sought to use statistical trickery to make such natural variation appear as ‘man-made’ warming.
Apart from playing with statistics Mann made his proxy fit the thermometer data by adding thermometer values to the proxy values known as “Mike’s trick” in the climate gate email scandal.
From the emails released during the Climategate scandal Professor Phil Jones, Britain’s top climate scientist at the University of East Anglia was shown to have written the following to his alarmist colleagues (some analysis here).
The email, sent by Prof Phil Jones of the CRU in 1999, states:
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow. I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps
to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from
1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land
N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.
Cheers
Phil
This has the Hockey Stick Graph showing the same cooling from 1942 to 1975 as the HadCRUT3 data as posted in the IPCC 2001 AR3
In 1942 there was just 4.0Gt of emissions increasing to 17.1Gt by 1975 but since this 425% increase in CO2 emissions didn’t cause any global warming during this 33 year period; the conjecture of CO2 emissions induced (catastrophic) global warming was proven false.
Readers interested in gaining a deeper understanding of what is likely to eventually be exposed as a criminal conspiracy between Mann and other ‘elite’ researchers should see “The Hockey Stick Illusion” by Andrew Montford.
The Guardian newspaper (above) expressing doubts over ‘(Michael) Mann-made’ global warming.
Victory that Comes at Great Personal Cost
Behind the scenes, gathering the resources, mental, scientific and financial, there is an untold burden of defending these cynical SLAPP suits.
Lest readers forget, it is mostly in the service of misguided public policy, with massive funding and connivance from political operators in play, that fake scientists like Michael Mann and Andrew Weaver acquired such esteemed public positions.
They are not only despicable human beings they are a disgrace to all decent scientists.
Readers will be aware that this author has been a staunch friend and ally to Tim throughout the hardships of this protracted 8-year legal battle.
Our reputations were routinely trashed by our enemies, so it is sweet justice that the court has now given legal credence to Tim’s famous words that Michael Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn State,” a comical reference to the fraudulent ‘hockey stick’ graph that knowledgeable scientists knew to be fakery.
[Author Note: Being very much a party to these legal proceedings (having provided Dr Ball with the financial security of a legally-binding indemnity in the event Tim lost) it is a monumental vindication of my faith in Tim’s cause. In effect, I ‘bet the farm’ on Tim winning, as graciously reported by Jo Nova (below)]
Knowingly Fraudulent and Corrupt
During 2018, while Tim Ball’s hard work was winning “concessions” from Mann’s legal team in Canada, south of the border, (on April 20) a shameless Mann wrote in Scientific American this utter nonsense:
“Yet, in the 20 years since the original hockey stick publication, independent studies, again and again, have overwhelmingly reaffirmed our findings, including the key conclusion: recent warming is unprecedented over at least the past millennium.”
Gullible and brainwashed greens and the many self-serving politicians swallowed up this garbage.
Dr Ball Expresses Gratitude to Principia Scientific International
Speaking in this 2018 video on the gravity of what some scientists have called “The science trial of the Century,” Dr Ball revealed his gratitude to his colleagues at Principia Scientific:
Dr Tim Ball:
I know John O’Sullivan who set up the Principia site and I know I wrote a foreword and a chapter in one of the books they produced called Slaying the Sky Dragon.
John O’Sullivan comes from his anti-government [stance], very legitimately and unfortunately, it’s not until you’ve actually directly personally experienced that; challenging the government – that you realize how nasty they can get. So John knows very well how nasty these things can get – that anyone that dares to challenge the authorities.
And so, Principia was set up for that reason, and John was the one that helped me set up the PayPal so people could help me financially so, that’s my disclaimer with that.”
“John O’Sullivan is putting in above and beyond what any single skeptical soul ought to.
He’s already been a key figure helping Tim Ball in the legal fight with the UVA establishment, which has spent over a million dollars helping Michael Mann to hide emails. The case was launched by Michael Mann, but could turn out to do a huge favor to skeptics — the discovery process is a powerful tool, and we all know who has been hiding their methods, their data, and their work-related correspondence.
Tim Ball and John O’Sullivan are helping all the free citizens of the West. The burden should not be theirs alone. There are many claims for help at the moment, but that is a sign that the grand scam is coming to a head. Jo”
Two out of Two Major Court Wins By Ball Versus Junk IPCC Scientists
Dr Ball, now affirmed as a courageous champion of honest science, has assured his place in the annals of real climate science. His gift to the world was sacrificing eight of his senior years, when he could have been enjoying his retirement, to exposing key players in the biggest science fraud of all time.
People too easily forget Dr Ball has defeated in expensive legal battles not just one top UN IPCC climate scientists, but two!
This latest victory is the second this champion of climate skepticism has enjoyed in the last 18 months in this same jurisdiction – both for “defamation,” both multi-million dollar climate science claims.
We reported (February 15, 2018) on Dr Ball’s first crucial courtroom win against Dr Andrew Weaver (photo, above), another elite junk scientist (a UN IPCC Lead Author in climate modeling) and British Columbia Green Party Leader.
Pointedly, at the time, Dr Ball wanted to emphasize an extremely salient fact:
“While I savor the victory, people need to know that it was the second of three lawsuits all from the same lawyer,Roger McConchie, (photo, left) in Vancouver on behalf of members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).”
In effect, there is more than mere coincidence that Dr Ball, a world-leading skeptical climatologist, was systematically targeted for legal retribution time and again by political groups such as the unscrupulous Climate Science Legal Defense Fund .
As a retired scientist in his 80’s, Tim was a ‘soft target’ and the stress of these lawsuits put an enormous toll on his health.
Not to be outdone, Tim has used his time wisely to write a damning book of the 30-year back story of the great climate fraud titled ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’ and I heartily recommend that interested readers buy it.
It is also not often reported that the funding in Canada for these extravagant SLAPP lawsuits is believed to be from the David Suzuki Foundation, a hot house for extreme environmental advocacy and Big Green policy promotion.
What is a ‘Strategic lawsuit against public participation’ (SLAPP Suit)?
Wikipedia offers a fair definition:
“A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.[1] Such lawsuits have been made illegal in many jurisdictions on the grounds that they impede freedom of speech.
In the typical SLAPP, the plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff’s goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs, or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. In some cases, repeated frivolous litigation against a defendant may raise the cost of directors and officers liability insurance for that party, interfering with an organization’s ability to operate.[2] A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate.”
Update (August 24, 2019):
Dr Mann Has Posted On Twitter In Reply To This Article:
In short, Mann’s ugly responsive legal statement is (a) stark admission he lost fair and square, and (b) a disingenuous argument that the Dismissal was granted merely on the basis of Mann’s “delay” in not submitting his R2 numbers in timely fashion.
Well, Mikey, You Are The Plaintiff And Tim Gave You Over 8 YEARS To Get Your Case Together!
On that point, this is where readers may wish to refer to the article ‘Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann‘ (July 4, 2017). In it we offered analysis as to Mann’s fatal legal error. As Dr Ball explained at that time:
“Michael Mann moved for an adjournment of the trial scheduled for February 20, 2017. We had little choice because Canadian courts always grant adjournments before a trial in their belief that an out of court settlement is preferable. We agreed to an adjournment with conditions. The major one was that he [Mann] produce all documents including computer codes by February 20th, 2017. He failed to meet the deadline.”
As I explained in the article, Mann (and his crooked lawyer) had shown bad faith, thereby rendering his case liable for dismissal. I urged Tim to pursue that winning tactic and thankfully he did.
AN APPEAL
Assisting Dr Ball has been a huge honor for me and probably one of the greatest achievements of my life. But Tim only won this famous courtroom battle thanks to massive worldwide grassroots support.
We can only continue to fight these protracted lawsuits with your kind support. Please give generously to ensure we can take on more crucial cases, such as this.
[WWG1WGA]
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
_________________
**Comment**
You may ask why in the world such an article appears on a website for Lyme/MSIDS patients. Please let me answer that by stating that on a near daily basis, research is crossing my desk in which the terms “Climate Change” and ticks or Lyme are in the titles despite research showing ticks are marvelously ecoadaptive and have survived for eons by seeking out leaf litter, snow, or anything that will offer protection.
This week, we celebrate our annual Mercury Awareness week, during which we ask for your continued financial support to put an end to the use of dental mercury worldwide
Mercola.com will match your donations, dollar for dollar, up to $150,000, given by August 31, 2019
In this interview, Charlie Brown shows how Consumers for Dental Choice is blazing four routes to victory for mercury-free dentistry: (1) the Chicago Declaration and its heated challenge to FDA; (2) the state rulemaking to require amalgam-using dentists to show proof they tell patients about amalgam’s mercury, its risks and its alternatives; (3) the phase-out amalgam campaign in Europe that is now spreading across Africa and Asia; and (4) the upcoming Amalgam phase-out amendment battle at the Minamata Convention on Mercury
To make amalgam a business loser, consumers should patronize mercury-free dentists only. Many dentists have seen the light and abandoned amalgam; it’s time for the others to feel the heat
Dr. Mercola raises his match by 20% this year. He asks both health professionals and consumers to consider doing the same!
In this interview, Charlie Brown, former state attorney general of West Virginia and executive director of Consumers for Dental Choice, provides us with an update to the global mercury-free dentistry campaign you’ve so generously helped us support through the past nine years.
We are now incredibly close to the ultimate finish line, thanks to Brown’s persistent and dedicated efforts and your unrelenting financial support. I want to extend a personal thank you to all who have contributed to this mission in the past, and are considering doing so now.
Brown has made it his life’s mission to remove mercury from dentistry across the world, which will also put an end to a large portion of mercury outflow into our environment. This week, we celebrate our annual Mercury Awareness week, during which we ask for your continued financial support to put an end to the use of this pernicious neurotoxin.
“The campaign for mercury-free dentistry has real wins, thanks to the grassroots help of Mercola.com readers,” Brown says. “We are toe-to-toe with the American Dental Association (ADA) and its million-dollar lobbyists across the country and around the world. We are advancing, and the ADA is retreating. Together, we will throw dental mercury into the hazardous waste bins of history.”
Pressure on US Food and Drug Administration is paying off
Over the past year, Consumers for Dental Choice has made advancements on multiple fronts by implementing a number of landmark strategies. In the U.S., Consumers for Dental Choice has applied pressure on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the likes of which the agency reportedly has never seen before.
In all, 50 groups, including the Sierra Club, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) and Greenpeace, signed the Chicago Declaration for Mercury-free Dentistry for America. “That really got FDA’s attention,” Brown says.
When the FDA invited public comment on how it’s doing on its medical devices, 80% of responses — four times that of all other devices combined — were about amalgam.
“People are sick and tired and they made it clear that the No. 1 public interest on medical device regulation is amalgam,” Brown says. “They’re sick and tired of FDA coddling up to the ADA, as it’s done this entire century.
Coming along too is the medical community … the National Medical Association (NMA) and the African-American physicians. They have gotten real interested in this. Their journal published a commentary about how amalgam is unfair to the children of color and other low-income children in this country.
Finally, the trade press is really biting at the heels of FDA. They’re really wanting to know why FDA is still not acting on amalgam. We now have information that FDA is going to move [on this issue].”
While it’s still too early for Brown to give specifics on what the FDA is planning to do, when available, I will bring him back for an update. As for the Consumers for Dental Choice petition to the FDA urging the agency to follow in Europe’s footsteps and eliminate dental mercury for pregnant women and children, more than 48,000 signatures have been received and delivered.
“The European Union, more than a year ago, ended amalgam for children under 15, and for pregnant and breastfeeding women. They required each member state — and there are 28 countries in the EU as of right now — to come up with a plan to go further.
We are saying to FDA, ‘Why are you lagging so far behind Europe? Why won’t you pay attention to the very treaty that the United States not only signed but was the first country in the world to ratify?’
As I said, the heat is building. We think we’re going to move, but they still have been way too close to the pro-mercury dentists. There’s no question. That’s the ADA. The ADA, however, doesn’t have the same clout they used to have because its own members are walking away.
Its own members are saying, ‘Why should I use amalgam just because you want me to? I don’t want to. My patients don’t want to. I don’t want to get people in my office sick.’”
Making amalgam a business loser is a winning strategy
This is undoubtedly a direct response to people following the advice given by Consumers for Dental Choice — the advice to not frequent any dentist who still uses mercury amalgam on ANY of his or her patients, even if it’s not you. By patients abandoning mercury-based dentists, more and more have recognized the folly of sticking with the ADA’s recommendation to keep using it.
“Basically, we are making amalgam into a business loser,” Brown says. We still have a way to go though, to get government-based dentists to follow suit and to get all insurance plans to cover mercury-free dentistry across the board, and not just in some instances.
Fortunately, as the dental amalgam market continues to shrink, amalgam manufacturers are also starting to follow the money and transition into making alternative filling materials instead.
“By making amalgam a business loser for the dentist and a business loser for the manufacturers, we are pursuing a success route,” Brown says. “We want FDA to change. But if FDA doesn’t change, we have a way to win regardless.”
Battleground Maine
In the U.S., Consumers for Dental Choice is also taking on Maine’s Dental Board. After filing a complaint, the board has agreed to create legislation requiring dentists to have informed consent before they can use mercury amalgam on a patient. Brown explains:
“Maine is our battleground state now … I’m in my element. I’ve been challenging dental boards for a long time. Years ago, we got rid of the gag rule. We won factsheet laws. We won disclosures. The Maine Dental Board is ignoring its duty to enforce the law on disclosure.
We have filed our petition, our protest, to the Maine Dental Board. They, in turn, have agreed to write a regulation, which will require the pro-mercury dentists to provide proof that they told the patients amalgam has problems … If they don’t do it, there’s going to be a discipline action against the amalgam-using dentists.”
In short, dentists using amalgam in Maine will be required to present patients with a factsheet detailing in clear language the adverse health effects of amalgam, and information on available alternatives.
Once given this information, patients are unlikely to choose amalgam, given the choice. It will undoubtedly also encourage more dentists to go mercury-free, as they have to admit, with documentation, that they’re putting toxic material into your mouth.
“When I started in this, the dental boards were prosecuting mercury-free dentists. Now we’ve turned the tables and said, ‘You’ve got to prosecute the pro-mercury dentists because they’re not following the law.’ We think with this success in Maine, we’re on the way.
They’re writing a rule. We’ve got a battle ahead this fall in 2019. It will be a prototype for other states. We’re going to prepare a kit for other states. If you want to get active in your state, you, the consumer, you, the dentist, you, the health professional, write me at Charlie@ToxicTeeth.org.
Write me, and I will work with you to get you the material so that in your state, you can parallel what we’re accomplishing in the state of Maine, our model state …
The good news is that the director of health, who wrote and approved that factsheet, her sister is now the governor of Maine. So, we think we’ve got support all the way to the top in Maine to get this thing done.”
Global progress
In addition to the success in the EU, Consumers for Dental Choice is also making great progress in the effort to eliminate dental mercury in Nigeria, Mauritius, Tanzania, Vietnam, Bangladesh and India.
“[The U.S.] Pentagon says they can’t afford the switch. They’re giving mercury fillings. The richest agency in the world — I’m sure — is not giving mercury-free dentistry to its soldiers and sailors, but Bangladesh is. India is.
India has the third biggest army in the world. Bangladesh is one of the poorer countries in the world. Yet no one in the Bangladesh Armed Forces gets amalgam. No one in their family gets it. They’ve gone completely mercury-free. Well, if Bangladesh can end using amalgam in their armed forces, so can the Pentagon,” Brown says.
Consumers for Dental Choice and its international allies were also instrumental in getting dental amalgam included in the Minamata Convention, which calls for significant reductions in mercury pollution from multiple sources.
“Things come to a head this November 2019,” Brown says. “During the last week of November, the governments from every country in the world will again convene. There are well over 140 countries to sign this Convention. Over 100 have ratified it. The United States was the first to ratify.
We will bring a team of people from the Americas, from the island states, from Africa, Asia and Europe — our dentists, engineers, lawyers, journalists and environmental leaders …
The governments, starting in Africa with the country of Gabon, and then a number of other countries, have proposed an amendment to the Minamata Convention: the amalgam amendment. It would phase out amalgam for children in two years, and phase it out for everybody else on a date that people would agree on.
That will be debated this November. We are mounting a full-fledged campaign. We’ve been asked by the African governments to lead civil society — lead the organizing from the outside while they work the inside and work the government.”
Much at stake in November
In the summer of 2019, four EU nations — Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland and Slovakia — followed in Sweden’s footsteps and phased out amalgam for all patients as of a specific date. During the November debate, Consumers for Dental Choice will fight to get all nations to agree to a complete phase-out.
“That’s going to be what they call the Third Conference of the Parties. This again has come, Dr. Mercola, because you dug in with us way back in 2011. You helped us put together this worldwide organization. You matched funds. You’re matching them again.
You’re matching them more than you ever have: $150,000. We hope to raise $150,000 dollars, which we’ll double with your funds to $300,000. We use it effectively. We use it efficiently …
Our staff size is the same as it was in 2011, when we started. Our money goes to the field. It went to the [creation of the] Chicago Declaration. It went to the Maine team that we organized to get front and center in our model state. It goes to some of the best environmental leaders I can imagine in Africa, Europe, Asia and Latin America. We have founded centers and intermediaries.
There’s the Latin-American Center for Environmental Health in Montevideo, the Asian Center for Environmental Health in Dhaka, Bangladesh, the African Center for Environmental Health in Abidjan, Ivory Coast …
The European Center for Environmental Medicine in Berlin … These are headed by talented people. They run the campaigns for us … We’re pretty darn good at organizing. If people choose to donate funds to us, I think our track record is pretty clear. We get things done …
One of the priorities this November is bringing our team to Geneva and winning at the table and getting the countries to agree, yes, it’s time to set an end date for this plague, this horrible mistake of putting mercury in the mouth. Now, here comes the world’s chance to correct that mistake.”
Please consider making a donation to Consumers for Dental Choice right now, and I will match your gift dollar for dollar, up to $150,000. Mercury is difficult to get rid of once it’s in your body.
Clearly, preventing exposure is the best strategy, and dental amalgams is one of the biggest contributors to mercury toxicity. By donating to this cause, you can help prevent the poisoning of literally billions of people around the world. You’ll also help protect our global environment from mercury pollution, a significant source of which is mercury-based dentists. As noted by Brown:
“The symbol of the Minamata Convention was the fish, because we all agreed we don’t want mercury in the fish that children eat. It causes permanent brain damage to them. That mercury came from many sources. One of the major sources was amalgam.
You can’t tell where that mercury came from, but everybody agreed we’ve got to work on all major sources. That’s how we got amalgam [included] as an environmental issue. It was the right strategy to start the beginning of the end of amalgam.”
Future projections
June 3, 2020, the European Commission will decide whether to recommend the phasing out of amalgam for all. Brown believes they will. After all, several European countries have already done it. Other nations are down to between 1% and 4% use. Similarly, Zambia has expressed willingness to phase out amalgam by 2021.
“We’re seeing that in one country after another that I visit,” Brown says. “For the Minamata Convention itself, we have the phase-down requirement. We are trying to shift that to phase-out. We will make a huge effort at that. This November, we hope to succeed.
If we don’t succeed, they will meet again in two years. Our chance to get the victory is 2019. Failing that, we’ll take another turn at that in 2021. By then, I believe we will win … We are very near the finish line. Again, I urge people to stay with us, because we can put this mercury into the hazardous waste bins of history.”
If you’re watching this, I encourage you to participate in this annual donation drive, and make a donation — large or small — to this worthy cause. Remember, I will match donation dollar for dollar, so it’s a win-win for everyone.
I raised my match 20% this year, from $125,000 to $150,000. Please consider doing the same, and raising your gift, at whatever level you give, by 20% too.
As I said before, Brown runs a really lean, mean organization. He doesn’t waste a cent. Your donations — as history has proven — will be used wisely, judiciously, frugally yet effectively, to end the use of mercury through legislative capacity within the next couple of years in several nations, and the entire world within 10. It’s a great goal, and I hope you will decide to play a part in this historical effort.
Dr. Mercola will match your gift for mercury-free dentistry
On August 25 through August 31, we launch Mercury-Free Dentistry Week. Mercury is an incredibly potent neurotoxin; it doesn’t take much to cause serious damage because it’s an absolute poison, it should never be used in dentistry — which is why I partner with Consumers for Dental Choice to get it banned from the planet.
I am so passionate on this cause that I am raising my match cap by 20%! Instead of matching $125,000, I will match up to $150,000 for all donations during Mercury-Free Dentistry Awareness Week. When it comes to mercury-free dentistry, I am proud to put my money where my mouth is!
The sole mission of Consumers for Dental Choice and of its leader Charlie Brown (pictured with me above) is to end the use of mercury fillings. This nonprofit group busts down one barrier after another to shift an entire medical profession from reliance on mercury fillings to foreswearing mercury fillings — spurred forward by a massive shift in consumer demand and key changes in government policies. Well on its way to success, this Herculean undertaking must continue — and it will continue if donors like you and I step up together!
Three major accomplishments
Consumers for Dental Choice leads the campaign to transition the world to mercury-free dentistry. Their campaign is not just working — it’s accelerating!
Consumers for Dental Choice’s success at the Minamata Convention treaty talks resulted in a requirement that countries must reduce their amalgam use. Now, many countries want to go even further: they have proposed an amendment to phase OUT amalgam use.
Consumers for Dental Choice’s ongoing European campaign resulted in a ban on amalgam use in children under 15, pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers in the EU. This summer four more EU countries — Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland and Slovakia — announced the full phase out of amalgam use on a timetable!
Consumers for Dental Choice is bringing the momentum of the Minamata Convention on Mercury home, igniting changes here in America:
The Chicago Declaration to End Mercury Use in the Dental Industry (2018), endorsed by more than 50 nonprofit groups including several environmental powerhouses, calls for the end of amalgam for children now, and the general phase-out with time-limited exceptions by 2020.
Uniting grassroots activism with mercury-free dentists, Consumers for Dental Choice is building the heat on the Food and Drug Administration. Almost 50,000 people signed the Consumers for Dental Choices petition to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration demanding the end of amalgam use in children. And more than 80% of all comments that flooded to FDA in response to its request for patient preference information in medical devices focused on amalgam. See a recent Op-Ed by Charlie.
Via its campaign against the state dental boards, Consumers for Dental Choice freed up mercury-free dentists to advertise, advocate and advise mercury-free dentistry. This summer, putting the Maine dental board under fire for disregarding its duty to implement the fact sheet law, Consumers for Dental Choice took legal action to compel the board to enforce the law.
How you can help the campaign for mercury-free dentistry
Consumers for Dental Choice and its team have made amazing progress toward mercury-free dentistry. But there’s still hard work ahead as Consumers for Dental Choice is breaking barriers that limit consumer access to mercury-free dentistry, forcing federal and state government agencies to be accountable, and mobilizing synergistic campaigns around the world.
Please consider making a generous donation. If you donate between August 25 and August 31, 2019, I will match your gift dollar for dollar! This year, I am putting up the highest match amount I ever have tor this cause: $150,000.
To succeed in the battle against the FDA, they need to reach this goal — please push the “DONATE TODAY” button below. Or if you prefer, you may mail your donation to: Consumers for Dental Choice, 316 F Street N.E., Suite 210, Washington DC, 20002
All donations made from August 25 to August 31, 2019, are matched by Dr. Mercola (up to a cap of $150,000).
All sorts of nifty graphs and charts on patients taking part in the project. If you haven’t added your information yet, go here to do so: https://www.mylymedata.org/
Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Department of Microbiology, Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, Newark, NJ 07103, USA
*Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 15 May 2019 / Accepted: 26 July 2019 / Published: 31 July 2019
Abstract
The incidence and geographic distribution of human babesiosis is growing in the U.S. Its major causative agent is the protozoan parasite, Babesia microti. B. microtiis transmitted to humans primarily through the bite ofIxodes scapularis ticks, which are vectors for a number of other pathogens. Other routes of B. microti transmission are blood transfusion and in rare cases of mother-to-foetus transmission, through the placenta. This review discusses the current literature on mammalian coinfection with B. microtiand Borrelia burgdorferi, the causative agent Lyme disease.
__________________
**Comment**
Please see above link for entire study. Highlights:
B. microti and Borrelia burgdorferi coinfection is common in vector (ticks) & host (animals & humans)
In endemic regions, almost 20% of Lyme disease patients reported concurrent babesiosis while up to 25% of babesiosis patients also had Lyme disease
A large percentage of patients with chronic/post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (52%) show evidence of past or active Babesia coinfection
There is some evidence that coinfections with a differentBabesiaspecies, B. duncani, and B. Burgdorferimay be more common than previously suspected.
Of the two studies that have examined B. microti—B. burgdorfericoinfection on humans both studies found patients reported symptoms of greater variety and longer duration than those infected with Bb alone
In C3H mice, B. microticoinfection exacerbates symptoms of arthritis caused by B. burgdorferi because B. microti causes splenic dysfunction that reduces B- and T-cell function and the production of antibodies required to control Bb infection
It aptly points out that besides infected ticks, humans can become infected with Babesia congenitally as well as by blood transfusions.
The only conclusion that can be made is that blood testing is not picking it up. I’ve read over and over that Babesia is rarely detected using one diagnostic test alone.
Yet, if I am reading this properly, they only used one test. If a sample was reactive, only then did they test it further – kind of like using 2-tiered testing for Lyme when you only move onto the Western Blot IF you test positive first using the Elisa. So these patient samples were tested only once at the beginning to determine who had reactive samples to Babesia.
This testing discrepancy that differs from reality is true for all tick-borne diseases and practitioners need to become educated in this fact as well as understand the importance of symptomology to determine a clinical diagnosis. The continued stubbornness of utilizing poor testing to weed out people in the beginning is foolish. It only seems logical to cast a wider net in the beginning rather than a narrower one. Everyone knows testing is abysmal, yet it’s followed like the Pied Piper to the doom of patients.
People are going to continue to fly under the radar with these pathogens until better testing is developed. Mainstream medicine has been lobotomized and is functioning without the capacity of a brain.
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 
