Please don't forget what the state did to us

In the summer of 2016, a videnskab.dk-article ('science'.dk) mentioned the research about biofilm. The insinuation is that there might be something to the longterm treatment after all. But the article also makes a clear point that nothing has pointed the mainstream towards longterm treatment before this new research. There is no mention of the patients' wish for more treatment (not just 3 weeks, that's not longterm), and no reference to the various co-infections that authorities deny patients (which happened to me under Anders Koch from SSI (the state serum institute)). Whereas liberalized healthcare would allow for treatment under private initiative, all alternatives have been squashed and out-competed by the state's monopoly, effectively denying our right to health. This mechanism is why I considered a human rights case, but it's too much of a hassle and I will write these rants for now.

http://videnskab.dk/krop-sundhed/borrelia-kan-muligvis-goere-dig-syg-for-livet

Forpinthed og dårlig hukommelse

»Smerter er ikke en neutral sansning. Det er ikke som at se en rød plet et sted i ens synsfelt, som man bare kan se udenom. Smerter er en oplevelse, som er sanselig og følelsesladet. Hvis der ikke var følelser med, så ville det ikke være smerter, så ville vi kalde det en fornemmelse. Så det er selve følelsesladningen – følelsen af ubehaget og desperationen, som gør smerte til smerte,« fortæller Søren Frølich, som er psykolog på Tværfagligt Smertecenter på Herlev Hospital og har mere end 40 års erfaring med at behandle smerter.

At smerte er en sansning betyder, at den kommer ind et bestemt sted i hjernen, hvor den påvirker vores følelsesregister. Faktisk er sansningen til stede i følelsesregistret og aktiverer vores stressrespons allerede før, impulsen dukker op i vores bevidsthed, og vi opdager, at det gør ondt.

Følelsescentret ligger klods op ad indgangen til langtidshukommelsen. Hvad der lagres her er blandt andet styret af vores følelser af lyst og ulyst. Og når følelsescentret er optaget af smerte og ulyst, så bliver der ikke lagret så meget.

De oplysninger, som kører rundt i korttidshukommelsen, bliver ikke gemt i langtidshukommelsen og dermed ikke husket. Fordi døren til langtidshukommelsen billedligt talt er spærret.

Mange er bange for, at de har fået en hjerneskade

»Det er ikke sådan, at man glemmer noget – det bliver simpelthen aldrig lagret. Og når så folk siger, kommer du på onsdag til mødet, og man svarer, ja det gør jeg. Så er det pist væk efter et par minutter. Når onsdag kommer, så kan du ikke engang huske, at du har fået beskeden,« forklarer Søren Frølich og tilføjer:

»Det er et meget stort problem for folk med kroniske smerter, for de er jo vant til, at oplysningerne bliver optaget i langtidshukommelsen. Det er de vant til. Pludselig kan de ikke huske noget, og det er ikke noget, de taler om. Mange bliver bange for, at de er ved at få en hjerneskade, eller at de er påvirkede af medicinen. Men som regel er det på grund af smerterne.«
"Smerter giver dårlig hukommelse" : Didde Rishøj.  Samvirke.dk (5/1/2016)
http://samvirke.dk/artikler/smerter-giver-darlig-hukommelse

Healthy

I want to be a healthy, and fill the next generation with my offspring. But I am intelligent, ugly, and will transmit my tick-infection and chronic illness to any lover. The tragedy of my life is currently absolute and nothing I ever asked for. I was born from nothing, with nothing, was given nothing, became nothing! And the only thing healthy about my life is my mental health, which is top notch. The only healthy thing about me is the same thing they offer me medicine for, because chronic pain must be a mental health problem (riiight). I'm more realistic and scientific than my own goddamn psychiatrist. I am too sober and analytical for this shitty life.

Danish welfare is a scam setup that only secures high wages for bourgeois offspring, paid by naive tax payers and the weak-minded patients who lack sufficient clarity to see the power structure and understand motivations of involved actors.

In recent months, there has been increased paranoia in media about Fake News and fake bloggers. One popular blogger turned out to be a Russian hired propaganda-machine. In the midst of distrust, I ask you to direct some of your distrust back onto the establishment, particularly the proof that is supposed to be the groundwork for psychiatry and neuro-degenerative diseases. I have been criticized and diagnosed for believing in a diagnosis without clear proof of the infection. Now, direct the distrust back onto those who should have proof at hand for their psychiatric definitions. They have none. It's a scam. The product is idle talk, the product is that nurses can sit in their chairs and get paid for speaking some words to people like me. It works for them, until all the real economic activity has moved overseas where it doesn't have to support a population of idle talkers. Bourgeois children growing up to have their cozy comfortable inner-city dream career of idle talking to desperate people.

F*** this oppressive bulls*** system.

It only works optimally if you're a healthy, pretty-looking insider moron who never questioned anything.

The uselessness of inner city theorists

I wanted to share a selection of articles and well-reasoned analysis of my situation.

But fuck it.

It's time to rant. My brain is rotting and my body is pain.

So what is the definition of 21st century?

Better education! More wealth! More progress!

Where 'better education' means technological knowledge in place of environmental groundedness.

More wealth means more plastic shit from China and virtual reality freedom.

More progress means society hurries in the direction that seems to be fruitful for the early adopters.

It's as stupid as that.

And who's in position to comment on it all, to provide perspective?

The inner-city theorist.

In the case of Lyme disease, I personally have an important story that should destroy the trust in ELISA-three-subspecies test. (Because of course I can't have an erythema migrans rash without having been infected with something. I can't think it into existence with my "mentally ill" brain.)

But instead of a revolution, instead of change... instead of hearing a few stories from the real world of forests and ethology, the academic system is set up to only listen to the technological 'translations' of real input. Bacteria is only real because THE MICROSCOPE reveals it. The infection is only real because THE IMMUNE-RESPONSE TEST reveals it. Etcettera.

Meanwhile, the real world dies.

The plastic economy flourishes, the kingdom of the living creatures dies.

And there is nothing to do about it but fight, legally and VEHEMENTLY.

Never trust a social democrat. They are spineless. They have no clear idea of what is yours and mine. They will step all over you as they fucking did to me. If fake-ass social democrat politicians wanted a taste of their own medicine, they would not lock their doors, and they would ban every little risk in life. They would oppress and kill us all. Because they don't want the people's input. They just want to manage cattle. My angry response is only human. It is pro freedom and pro life. They attacked me. I want to leave at least a trace on this blog that I did not consent to it. I know I'm getting played like a weak chess piece, but for the sake of documentation and historical correctness, let it be known that I did not consent.

Journalists, please expose the empty claims of psychiatry!

Mentally ill. As a child, in the school yard someone attacked me physically, ended with a serious fight where my head was smashed into a heavy iron lock. Did it harm my brain? Maybe. But it's not in any journal. As a young man, I had a tick gorging on my blood for more than one whole day, and I got tested for three subspecies of one type of infection. Then when the connection wasn't obvious, it was dropped and deleted from future healthcare approaches.

After various subtle but very concrete causes have been ignored and done away with, what we have left is some 'word-salad', some theories about why people experience chronic pain and depression and 'delusions of infections'. The 'word-salad' theories do not solve the problem, there are no proposed solutions, only theories about how these ailments can spring from nothing now that every reasonable cause has been 'debunked'.

And the psychiatric system is in place to manage lives "lost" to those useless theories. The patients are still alive, but they're in the ditch and no one is trying to carry them to anywhere else health-wise. Communication skills are very important for the nurses in psychiatry. They should be sweet and kind people so the total emptiness of their services will be tolerated by those in the ditch. They should believe in the big social project rather than in dedication to individuals (the latter would be Christianity and has been mostly eradicated from Europe over the past century). As long as statistics show that most people are mostly satisfied with their life, there is no need to ruminate over the few lost ones. Not in the mental world of believers in effective unchallenged socialized medicine. 

All it takes for progressive politicians to decide to attack a private hospital: 1 hour of superficial primetime documentary.

What would it take for progressive politicians to denounce and dislodge psychiatry forever?

Attack on my Authority

I want to email the authorities and ask them whether they ever took ethics courses. Because even if they are right that the tick didn't infect me with something, it's still blatant that the test is limited in several ways, for example the exclusion of non-borrelia infections. I don't support them in their certainty. So is it moral to completely sabotage my access to a standard course of antibiotics as well as my access to further/wider testing? Is it defensible, even if they're right, in a case where the patient is informed and disagrees with them?

The ultimate consequence of this 'moral loophole' is that my judgment has to be rendered delusional, or else they look bad for denying me what I ask for. My continued insistence that they rely on sketchy unreliable premises has been made central to my new diagnosis. It's a symptom. My insistence is a form of obsessive delusion typical of psychiatric patients. This way, the more I insist and speak about tick infections, the more mentally ill I appear to be.

The problem with this attack on me is that doctors agreed fully with my assessment, until the antibody detection test of the three subspecies came back negative from the laboratory. Then the doctors, following their guidelines, simply trusted their orders and declared me non-infected.

But why then is my journal full of mentions of a visible erythema migrans rash?

Why did a room full of doctors agree that an infection seemed likely and a spinal tap justified?

 Why do lots of experts agree that reality has proven the test unreliable?

The main difference between my conviction and that of the authorities is that I don' trust the science backing the guidelines. Just like most 'lyme science' was criticized for being 'sub standard' by the danish guideline co-author Ram Dessau, I know that the old foundation for lyme policies has been criticized for being badly designed. (for example in the "No Small Thing" article series)

I think that more than three subspecies could possibly cause borrelia, or that some people may be without immune response to the infection, or that it could be a different pathogen altogether (that the 'know-it-all' modern scientists are too busy to examine). If you have a healthy imagination, you can get many more options for shooting the test down below "100% reliability".

And it's not revolutionary to do so, since many high-profile cases of private treatment have been in the media. Typically rich people with lots of spare time to see through their doctor's ten-minute survey. Ordinary people, and young people trapped in the socialized economy, do not have the resources to fight back. We live and we die by the system's capability for justice.

Against the Nanny State

In 2016, I saw how a big tax-supported TV production ("Snyd eller borrelia") neglected a critique of danish diagnoses. The diagnostic methods for ALS, ME, fibromyalgia, skizophrenia were completely left out of the programme, and instead it ended on a note of closure when a man was told that his tick infection was a fraud and he instead got an ALS diagnosis. The documentary did not examine ALS at all, not the supposed science behind it, not the compared benefits and risks between the man's desired and current treatment versus the 'State Certified' ALS treatment.

I took extensive notes from the show, but the core of it was half a dozen anecdotes, so the question is how necessary it should be to add to its conclusion that 'false positives are a real thing, and you can't blindly trust private laboratories'.

One danish politician (a social democrat) was instant in her willingness to shut down the laboratory in question and perhaps go even further and 'safeguard' all patients by shutting down clinics all over Europe.

My hypothesis is that danish doctors downplay their own cognitive biases. Bias is often spoken of in terms of economic self-interest (for example, "the car dealer sold me a bad car, and he was so biased he walked away laughing"). But the danish welfare doctors are biased against 1) challenging the legal system/bureaucracy 2) expending too much mental and physical energy when they can sit back instead and call the problem simple and solved 3) going against colleagues and/or friends in other departments of the same organizational structures.  

I'm so fucking done with this hypocrisy that I will never again support a move towards more taxation or more welfare. To me, welfare has become a tool to obfuscate the cost/benefits of an economic decision. If you want to obfuscate your uselessness as a politician, you can just throw money at welfare and get an easy pass for 'helping the weak'. If you want to really seem like a hero, add some free education to really lift the poor and the cursed out of their condition. No matter what their local conditions are, just throw a university degree at everyone.

I find it ridiculous that it's been so easy for me to get a psychiatric diagnosis, and meanwhile get attacked and oppressed for not being scientific. If anyone deserves the scientists' attacks and mockery, it would be the perpetrators of diagnosing citizens without proving or testing anything, except for a short talk and some weak correlations with other people who felt the same pain.

At least I have a chain of causal effects to explain my hypothesis. A tick-bite after 24 years of strength and vigor, 1 year after a successful trek along a Norwegian fjord with steep climbs, then after a few days in a forest garden, a sudden collapse into exhaustion and chronic pains.

Psychiatry doesn't explain that. They're deluded.

I read an article that asked the authorities why they still use a limited test. Their argument was that they trust the official report/manual. But why trust a limited test that only even looks for three subspecies of one type of infection. If I walk into a hospital and ask for antibiotics after a tickbite, I expect to be scientifically tested for tick-infections in general, and I certainly don't expect to be denied treatment on the basis of my immune system's response to three subspecies of one bacteria. To test me in such a preposterously limited way is not scientific. Especially given the lack of alternative explanations/hypotheses. And even more so given the actual rash that I presented and that doctors thought to be erythema migrans.

I should be a lot angrier and more hostile than I am. Because, I know the battle is lost. I know the system is built in such a way that it can never be moved by 'the little man', and can never be radically overturned on any scale.

My only hope right now is enough time and energy to closely read through meta-studies and/or investigative journalism and REALLY pick apart old foundations for the persisting recommendations. I want to tear down the wall between me and my right to buy medicine, my right to take a personal risk.

Further reading against the state:
https://c4ss.org/content/16623
https://www.libertarianism.org/explore/type/essays?searchquery=health
https://mises.org/library/whats-really-wrong-healthcare-industry
https://mises.org/library/myth-free-market-healthcare
https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052
https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/era-expert-failure