Updated: Aug 26
This was a study done at a company in Indiana. We were blessed with 100 soles in their populations. After 12 months, 70 remained in the program. We created quite a comprehensive workup on each. Jasmin, Dr. Carter, and Dr. Austin all contributed greatly to this work.
Somehow good fortune and contacts afforded a relationship with Baylor, Scott and White in Dallas Texas. Dr. Huang is sponsoring me on his channel at CureUs and helping me get some of my work published. This is the 1st of 4 paper I intend to publish. No, CureUs isn't the New England Journal of Medicine, but it does have good readership. I've been rejected by so many journals that I'm extremely grateful to have a dependable outlet for our efforts.
Here are my 3 favorite stories of rejection:
The New England Journal of Medicine: When I submitted the "inquiry" to publish, I wrote to all my medical friends stating, "might as well get rejected by the best..." I got to banter with the deputy Editor after my rejection. I told her that I followed the long-time editor of the Journal and he wrote an award-winning magazine article about the corruption in Medicine as orchestrated by big Pharma. She graciously ignored me. My final dig at the journal was to point out how they published an unsubstantiated, and subsequently retracted paper demonizing hydroxychloroquine and suggest that my paper might compensate for that poor decision. I also suggested that I'd change the intervention to a statin rather than a natural health approach if that would facilitate publication.
I submitted to a population health journal https://home.liebertpub.com/publications/population-health-management/301/for-authors I was told that the scope of my paper - chronic diseases - was not broad enough for their readership?!? I wrote the commenter a scathing reply and was subsequently invited to never submit to that journal again!
Sage Open Medicine: That looked very promising. However, one reviewer took exception to my use of the term, "determinants of health" to describe life risks, more or less. This reviewer went on and on about my misuse of the term. I checked the definition and it still seems to fit - "what determines your health..." pretty basic. I could have re-written the article without that term. But instead, CureUs came along and invited me to submit with a sure path to publication.
No journal is perfect, they all have "selection bias." For example, their editing platform doesn't allow for bulleted lists, it restricts the number of tables and figures, and most strangely, limits references to 30. My original article had 99 references. How do you keep the paper the same and eliminate 69 references? I managed, but feel that some of my statements are hanging out there unsupported. At some point, I'll take this final, published and edited version and merge it into the original with all the references so I have a complete version.
If you have read this far, then maybe you will read the article. I encourage you to read the introduction as it's part manifesto.
One paper will be on an chronic infectious disease study in 41 people that my team conducts and another 100 or so that Dr. Trempe studied. Our part, I believe, will be particularly illuminating because Jasmin followed the herxheimer's reaction of each individual on antibiotic treatment almost daily. No one has done such a detailed prospective workup on people with chronic infection on antibiotics.
It's not too late to join this program. I'll send any newbies a link to past presentations....
Thomas J. Lewis, Ph.D.