Lenny Flank, Daily Kos, and the Bozos

The link to Lenny’s article–filed under Science Matters.  Click here 

An opinion piece about catching Lyme from the internets–filed under science.  I know.  

Lenny tries to make this a patient versus expert issue. Nothing could be further from the truth.  
Not only does Lenny make up facts through most of his opinion piece, the people reading and commenting on it actually believe it — then base their opinions and judgments on a foundation of lies, making their comments, what they believe to be rational insights, laughable to those who have a clue.
Case in point: Bozo #1. 


As someone with way more experience, let me tell Bozo that most patients do not care about any conspiracy. Many don’t even know about it; they are simply trying to get better.   
It’s not hard to understand corruption when you read about how Tobacco had their own scientists say that smoking was just fine, and then had doctors go out and say so to the press. That was called a conspiracy too back then. 
All one needs to do is read about the history of the research, IDSA guideline process, and the facts in the research. It’s not anything you need to twist your mind to believe. Corruption and conflicts of interest happen all the time in research. It’s not new.  
Since Lenny told Bozo that there is no evidence for persistence, he believes diagnosing such a disease is a problem. Unfortunately, Lenny lied. There is so much evidence out there for persistence it’s ridiculous.  
But don’t take my word for it. Let’s look at what Paul A, persistent persistence denier (even after this study) has to say.  Well heck– all you need is the study title.  For those who don’t know, those are antibiotics they are using. 

Drug Combinations against Borrelia burgdorferi Persisters In Vitro: Eradication Achieved by Using Daptomycin, Cefoperazone and Doxycyclin. 

Here is the study if you want to check it out.  Click Here

They aren’t even challenging the existence of persisters at this point–and the funny thing is that they found what works best is pulse therapy with combination antibiotics.  Sure that’s in mice.  But coincidentally this is the system many LLMDs have used to make patients actually reach remission.  Not based on guesses but based on previous research and what is known about other bacteria/disease processes.  

What if any of these Bozos make a judgment call based on what they read in his opinion piece about their own medical illness? Isn’t that exactly what Lenny says Lyme patients did and shouldn’t do? Of course no one should base their medical decisions on internet readings. But that doesn’t mean people should irresponsibly write opinion pieces filed under “science” and think that won’t happen.  

Lenny embodies all that he says is wrong with Lyme patients and their doctors.  Except he can’t prove this is actually what Lyme patients have done.  Anyone can take a story or 2 off the internet, but to call that “most” or charaterize it that way is nothing more than lying. 

I can actually back up all my facts with research. Lenny can’t. People need to be more careful what they fall for. It’s immensely sad what these commenters fell for without even a second thought.  
Don’t they wonder where he gets his numbers? “Most common treatment,” “small minority of patients,” “many LLMDs.” Really Lenny? You conduct some sort of poll or survey no one else knows about? Maybe you have a crystal ball?  
Lenny claims there was research done that showed a repeat EM rash shows a new infection, not persistent symptoms. Well duh. Of course a study of 17 people who were treated right away, then get another rash years later were probably bitten again. Who even questioned this? However, this was not a study about anyone having persistent symptoms at all. So exaggerating the claims does not make your point. It shows either Lenny is a liar or he didn’t actually read the study.  
My advice, and the advice of the good Lyme patient advocates will always be : Get all the facts from all sides, verify said facts, and then make the best decision for you by working with your doctor.  Funny how the people like Lenny never say this.  

Lenny says people got Lyme from being gullible and reading the internet;  why wouldn’t we then be cured by reading his article?   Oh wait I know.  Because that’s idiotic.  Funny how many people fell for it.  

–Loon Out 

Lyme Western Blot

I will expand on this post in the future, but I just want to ask: If there are so many issues with the ELISA, why hasn’t there been a push by anyone in the CDC to go right to the western Blot?  After all, it does provide bands that are specific only for Borrelia.  Surely ID docs would agree that shows more of what is going on than simply one’s immune response to Borrelia.  The IDSA (and Babs especially if I am remembering right) tries to convince people that you will get far too many false positives this way.  Isn’t that much better than way too many false negatives?  And how can you have much of a false positive with reporting the bands specific for Borrelia? (Not the CDC’s surveillance only bands).  

I think this is mostly what the better LLMDs do–to confirm a diagnosis, not to GET a diagnosis.  And they are said to be so awful for doing this, even sending it to the better labs that use better tests.  Really?  Since when don’t ID docs want the most exact, specific result for a bacteria?  Maybe they are paranoid about certain labs just scamming people for money and not really being better.  Being paranoid isn’t a really good thing for patients.  Maybe they should check them out factually instead of assuming whatever crap they read about these labs is true.  

But, again, I’ll expand on that.  I just see no reason the CDC hasn’t done this a long time ago.  They have blood on their hands, definitely.  I just wonder how long until they realize they will, one day, be nailed for it.   Might not be now, might not be for years, but the sooner they let it go on, the worse it will be.  

If they want anyone at all to listen to them on Zika, Ebola, whatever–they need to get on this and make it right. 
–Loon Out 

One Too Many

I love and respect my friends and family, but I’ve seen one too many “funny” antivax … things. 

First:  For those proven to be hurt by vaccines…it’s not funny.  These are people I know doing this, and I know they’re not the type to go to the cancer ward and make fun of the kids who lost their hair…yet they post these “funny” things.  But maybe they’re just not thinking.  

Secondly, I’m not alone in my feelings outlined below.  
Being so adamant that the CDC has absolutely nothing to hide on vaccines is way too naive. Putting antivax labels on those who want more accountability, safety checks and research on vaccines is doubly so. Being careful is bad now? Where else do we just say..nah…I’m gonna trust the government has my back…without any real transparency or checks and balances? Are they really so trustworthy? 

Don’t you want to know what causes the worst vaccine reactions? You want to just keep hoping your luck isn’t going to run out? Where’s the science in that? 

I’ve seen so many similarities in Lyme and vaccine science. Bad research, corruption, flat out lying by those in positions of trust, utter character destroying for anyone not spouting the party line.  

Making normal people hate other normal people just for wanting information, accountability, and safety in their health choices.  

Tell me that last one is not the craziest. You’re really going to think I’m terrible for demanding a safe product…especially when there are already places that demand compliance? And these are sometimes people who hate being forced to buy insurance. Why don’t you want the safest possible product if it is so necessary that you believe people should be forced to get it?  

I want way more info on a vaccine before anyone forces me to get one. If you don’t, then maybe you dont realize how little we, as a country, as a world, know about disease, bacteria, and our immune systems. 

 It’s less scary to trust the CDC and doctors. It’s also less scary to hide under your covers. But safer? Not by a long shot. If you want to trust and hide–fine. Just stop bad mouthing those like me who would rather have answers and proof instead of happy pretty lies.  

–Loon Out

Chronic Lyme Cult Awareness and Other Idjits 

You really have to wonder if these people are in real life or what.  Have they just not read the science?  Are they paid to lie? Do they just like to troll people?  Deeply in denial?  Maybe all of the above.  

When you read comments like the one below by CLCA, it’s pretty obvious they have serious issues regarding reality.  Or they just want to convince people that they have a reality that is actually, well, real.  

CLCA quote: “The CDC-recommended guidelines are not outdated. The evidence against long term antibiotics treatment has only grown stronger in the last decade. The National Guidelines Clearinghouse does not endorse guidelines and there is no requirement that the guidelines be scientific, only that they meet certain formal requirements. A group of quacks called ILADS has submitted pseudoscientific guidelines to that web site, but they admit right in the guidelines that each recommendation is based on “very low-quality evidence”. Doctors should be wary of any treatment recommendation based on “very low-quality evidence”.” 

Citation needed infinity. 

One thing I think CLCA doesn’t understand is that there are many poor quality studies in Lyme disease.  This is caused by the complexity of the organism AND the fact that so many of the original researchers did not do a good job on the research.  The IDSA out-of-date guidelines based over half of their recommendations on expert opinion (level III evidence).  Which is poor quality evidence.  But they don’t like to really talk about that.  ILADS spells out the fact instead of trying to hide it.  The IDSA probably doesn’t want people to know it, though, because they are the ones who did a lot of the crappy research.  The IDSA doesn’t only do this with the Lyme guidelines though.  From 30 published guidelines by the IDSA, it was found that more than half of the recommendations were based soley on expert opinion.  

But facts and stuff don’t fit the “crazoversy.” 

You can call ILADS a group of quacks, and if a person reading that knows absolutely nothing about ILADS or who they are, they may actually believe it.  However, when you go and fact-check these statements, you find what utter nonesense they are.  I call these types of trolls/paid disinformationers idjits because it’s faster to write, but basically it is anyone who has either no clue about the science of Lyme, or they are liars.  I have no idea of their motives because people like that really baffle me.  It could be any of the reasons above or a plethora of other things.  One never knows.  

All of them, to me, are quite creepy.  
I’m not just saying that as an insult.  Think about it.  In real, not internet, life –how absolutley strange would it be for someone to have such an issue with people who have a certain illness that they create a persona and argue about it, all while either being completely obtuse about it (on purpose) or being completely uneducated about the facts of this thing they are so obsessed with?  


One can take almost anything idjits say and show exactly and positively how factually wrong it is.  They either are in such denial or ignorant or are lying in the first place — so what’s the point?  Anyone who knows the least bit about Lyme and how the organism works, has been following the latest research, can tell how totally ridiculous they sound.  

Those who actually know better and are lying (for whatever reason) seem to be behind a bit though.  There is a point where even the CDC, IDSA, and other experts who have been denying persistence have to jump on board the reality train because otherwise they will miss out.  They know they can’t deny or hide much longer–the science has caught up in a way they can’t confuse the gullible anymore.  

This is one reason is why I believe Paul Auwaerter was involved in the study that shows how persistence of borrelia works in mice and how to treat it.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4373819/   We know he didn’t jump on that research vein because he believed persistence wasn’t a thing.  Can you imagine someone TRULY 100% believing there was no persistence in Borrelia then deciding to join a research team to study not only persistence but HOW TO TREAT IT?  Come on.  

He knew persistence was real, and he knew it for years.  But he couldn’t admit it.  Now he can AND try to save face at the same time–by being one of the people to “discover” it.  (Even though LLMDs have known for years combo and pulse therapy work).   

Unlike the way Bobby uses the phrase in Supernatural, “idjits” is not a term of endearment on my part regarding these people.   It’s yet another way I laugh at them. 

There is a part of me that feels sorry for their kids or other loved ones who might be caught in the karma (or ignorance) crossfire that will be coming.   Hopefully, any innocents will take them with the grain of salt the rest of us do. 

–Loon Out 

Why Lyme Patient Advocates Should Absolutely Make Lyme Policy 

Here is a link to the article.  Don’t hurt yourself rolling your eyes if you read it.  I think I strained something.  

The role of patient advocates in Lyme disease policy should be limited

According to the latest set of idjits, Lyme patient advocates should not make Lyme policy because 

1. We read too much crap on the internets. “While patient research can often be helpful to both patients and informative for health providers, it becomes problematic when there is a preponderance of non-scientific or non-peer reviewed information online.”  

Apparently these “writers” do not realize that it’s not too hard to find the research journals and the research articles and read those.  Maybe not everyone can understand it, but you get pretty good at understanding how to correctly research a subject when death is on the line.  

Admit it.  You read that in Vizzini’s voice didn’t you?  

As you can tell by their comment section (and by the fact they shut it down), these days Lyme patient advocates and what they write on the internet outnumber the crud articles the half-truth-writers put out.  

2. We’re dumb.   “Furthermore, the general public is not as adept as experts at assessing risks of treatment or critically assessing scientific research.”

Talk about the least self-aware statement I have seen in a while.  

3. And by patient advocates they mean patients.  “However, the voices of patients must not trump evidence-based science in the development of health policy.”  

The people trying to separate patient from expert become pretty obvious after reading as many Lyme articles as I have.  I become very suspicious of those who do it because there is really only one reason TO do that: Make it seem like they can never be one and the same.  

In my experience, (and I am pretty sure I know more Lyme patients than the writers do), the average Lyme patient has been educated by some of the top experts in the field.  Some of the experts have had Lyme themselves. So not only do we have the input of someone who knows the disease personally, they also have been learning about the disease from people like: 

 Dr. Willy Burgdorfer who believed in persistence and that the current state of patient care for Lyme disease was crap.  Oh.  He also discovered that Lyme was caused by Borrelia … 

Dr. Eva Sapi: Lyme patient and researcher who has made some pretty awesome breakthroughs over the years.

The late Dr. Burton Waisbren, a founding member of the IDSA.  Yes, that says IDSA. You should read what he thought about the IDSA guidelines on Lyme.  Wee-Ow.   Click Here To Read His Critique 

So if they don’t think patient advocates should make policy–Who else should do it?

Certainly not the people who have been doing it the last 30 years.  We wouldn’t even be in this situation if they hadn’t screwed up the science and, on top of it, lied about it.  
Which set of people would you trust are more careful when writing policy so it is in the best interest of the public?  The people with conflicts of interest, those who have anything at all to gain or lose monetarily?  Those who have lied about what the science, sometimes their OWN science, has shown?  Those who try to hide or lie about other research?  

I know who I would trust: Those who will be directly affected by the new policy, those who were directly affected by the old policy, and the experts who have seen and felt all aspects of the disease.  This group is exactly who I would trust.  And those people are Lyme patient advocates. 

Maybe these writers were “taught the crazoversy.”  Maybe they just didn’t do enough research.  They should know better.

They should be more careful about something this important.  

Writers like these two don’t even realize they have been taken in by the line, so much so they can sleep at night thinking they did the right thing.  I have seen tougher people brought down by smaller mistakes.  

I hope McPhail and Shelley can live with themselves once they realize what they  have become a part of:  The perpetual disparaging, lying, and bullying towards those who are living breathing examples of the utter failure of the IDSA Guidelines.  They’re pissed they screwed up and so they shoot the messenger, using you as their bullets. 

Moral of the story: Stop being a tool.  

Sorry.  You know I just couldn’t resist that. 

–Loon Out 

Three Cheers for the Lyme Trolls! 

I just want to take a moment to thank all those apparently anonymous and courageous people who spend more time than normally one would for strangers to help educate people about a disease they never even experienced and boldly tell them what they should do about it. It must take months of study at the prestigious Busy-Body U to learn this technique, and they selflessly use it on Lyme disease!    

How would Lyme patients know, otherwise, that their treatment isn’t working if it wasn’t for your insistence from miles away that it wasn’t working and was actually dangerous for them! They would have totally been fooled by their own ability to live their lives again! It takes a special type of person to stomp down that normal little voice that would tell one to ignore the obsessive need to control others so much they tell them what medicines to take.  Beyond that, it takes an utter genius to even know the state of their medical health without even knowing their medical history!  

But we understand you are magic, and we know the reason you insult Lyme patients is because you care! You know so much more than they do about our own lives and symptoms, conversations with their doctors, and what sort of medicines they take or are prescribed.  It must be difficult remembering so many details about so many people! I’m sure it’s not because you just assume.  I also am sure you have taken the time to research real LLMDs and what they use for treatment, and through some amazing empathic powers you just KNOW what this disease feels like for each and every single patient and also what exactly would help them.  
The breakthrough research in the last few years is obviously just useless no matter what type of experts it is done by.  Without you how else would we know Paul Auwaerter truly doesn’t believe in persistence unless you brought up his older quotes about it? His newer research was probably done under duress or something. I would have been so fooled otherwise!  It’s pretty convincing stuff that Paul put his name on.  For example (Click here to be taken to the quoted recent study ): 
“In vitro, B. burgdorferi developed increasing antibiotic tolerance as morphology changed from typical spirochetal form in log phase growth to variant round body and microcolony forms in stationary phase. B. burgdorferi appeared to have higher persister frequencies than E. coli as a control as measured by SYBR Green I/propidium iodide (PI) viability stain and microscope counting. To more effectively eradicate the different persister forms tolerant to doxycycline or amoxicillin, drug combinations were studied using previously identified drugs from an FDA-approved drug library with high activity against such persisters.” 

Intriguingly, a recent study in humans demonstrated the recovery of B. burgdorferi DNA by xenodiagnosis in a single patient with PTLDS despite antibiotic treatment [14].”

” Although these drug candidates active against persisters may not have good activity when used alone due to their poor activity against growing B. burgdorferi, it raises the question whether they may be used with another antibiotic such as doxycycline that is effective at inhibiting or killing the growing forms of B. burgdorferi. Such combinations may yield more effective treatment of Lyme disease.”

“Experimentally, since a stationary phase culture contains mixed populations of growing and non-growing bacteria that have different morphological variants such as round bodies and microcolonies that are tolerant to antibiotics [16, 17, 24], it is most likely that a single drug may not effectively kill all bacterial populations including morphological variants. In this study, we evaluated a range of drug combinations with the aim to identify optimal drug combinations that are most effective at killing B. burgdorferi persisters.”

Another amazing aspect is you even do all this educating using a pseudonym. You know it’s not classy to toot your own horn! 

I’m sure it’s not easy to point out how much the “science is settled” when all these new findings keep getting published!  I don’t know how you do it. 

Don’t let anyone tell you to focus more on your own life and stop obsessing over people you don’t know.  They don’t understand how important it is for you to control others … Your concern is just so DEEP and you just know so much BETTER than them!  You’re not a narcissist –you truly are just that great!  It has nothing to do with your inability to control your own life. That’s hogwash!  I’m sure you have no other agenda  or make money like those silly doubters say you do!  Keep on posting, commenting, blabbering all over the Internet.  I’ll be sure to keep records so people will never forget your legacy and all the really smart things you have said over the years! 

In all seriousness, trolls, please do continue.  The things you say in your own words prove you are extremely ignorant about Lyme and other TBDs (or you’re lying your pants off).  And if you really DON’T have another agenda or get something else out of trolling Lyme patients and lying about the science, you might want to PRETEND you do.  It’s probably better to be known as a sadistic, greedy liar than the incredibly twisted, creepy type of person it would take to act that way for reals. 

— Loon Out 

PLEASE Trial Questions No One is Asking 

Many of my fellow Lyme bloggers and writers have done such a wonderful job at knocking the POS research also known as the PLEASE Trial, so I haven’t really felt the need to write one of my own.  

There are a few things I do want to point out; Things the mainstream media articles don’t even consider asking. You know, those done by “reporters” who took the bait the authors of the trial fed to them and acted like it was a vacation since they didn’t have to do any work, like even reading the trial study, because it was all wrapped up in a nice little bow by others.  Idjits. 

 If these points were mentioned somewhere out there–I apologize.  I haven’t had time to read them all.  

The first point has more to do with the label of Lyme disease in general.  They have a name for the disease you get when you catch it right away and get treated right away– Lyme disease. They have a name for the disease you (supposedly) get when you were treated but then have symptoms–PTLDS (Post Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome). But what is the name of what those patients have when they are infected by the Lyme bacteria but don’t get diagnosed or treated for years? Where is even the recognition that the name for this entity is missing (much less any sort of trials or research at all).  Why are they getting lumped in to these other disease names?  I suspect those patients with the most problems regarding treatment are those who have this unnamed entity.  THERE IS NO RESEARCH I have seen regarding these patients, and so-called reporters need to start to understand how much they are missing if they don’t do even a little bit of research into the disease they are writing about. But instead, they just act as if the PLEASE trial ended any possible options in the antibiotic realm for these patients because these few antibiotics and doses “didn’t work” for this particular subset of patients.  

Tell me this makes any sense at all.  

Secondly: I have read quite a few articles about the PLEASE trial by those lazy, idjit reporters.  They all say basically the same thing, that this trial shows long-term antibiotics do not help Lyme patients.  Forgetting how incorrect that is for the moment, why has not one article pointed out that it may just be possible that this trial shows these particular antibiotics may not be the best treatment for Lyme.  And if that is the case, why have they done yet another study about those antibiotics instead of trying others?  

And maybe if they did make that connection or ask that question, they would find there actually is a study that does just that (though it is only about in vitro antibiotics) and one of the authors of that study is Paul Auwaerter (who is constantly quoted by those saying how crazy it is to treat Lyme with more antibiotics, pulse dosing, or combination therapy).  

Wouldn’t a good reporter also wonder why it took over 30 years to even do research like that?  Sort of makes one think there aren’t too many good reporters out there in the mainstream, eh? 

 I have said over and over too many people these days just take whatever websites, videos, articles, TV, radio, tell them, and they don’t do their own research.  If this is you, you are not a reporter, you are just a parrot.  A parrot being used by others to promote an agenda that is hurting patients.  

For those mainstream “reporters”–PLEASE make an effort when researching your next article on Lyme.  

Or don’t be surprised if people start throwing crackers at you. 
— Loon Out 

All Headlines Ever Written are Wrong

Recent articles by Alice Park (@aliceparkny and Dr Ambar) on two websites , Time.com and healthunits.com, jumped to such far conclusions I only thought it fair to do the same by writing the above headline on this blog post.  I used a fact or 2 (their headlines were factually wrong) and exaggerated that to include all headlines ever.  

I could have gone further and said something like “Writers Paid to Put Readers’ Health in Jeopardy.”  But that wouldn’t be QUITE the same thing, though it would be similar enough. 

This problem of absolute lies/untruths/incorrect information being out there once is then exacerbated by these articles still existing.  No corrections that I found, no one really complaining, no one fired.  So apparently this is okay now in journalism.  I’m not sure how major “healthunits” is, but “Time” has been around a while.  Maybe I shouldn’t assume these “writers” are journalists who actually consider ethics to be, you know, a thing. 

Let’s say they did this about, oh I don’t know, fashion.  Big deal, right?  It’s not going to affect anyone’s decisions that could hurt them except maybe to wear something that is out of style.  But when you write factually wrong headlines about a major disease–this can cause people to make wrong decisions about their, or their children’s, health.  So to say that the writers hurt people would be really reaching, of course, and probably libel.  But they definitely COULD hurt people with these headlines; the same can be said for the articles, although they are not AS bad.  I don’t absolve these writers, though, either because they seem to have done very little research on a subject that should be written about very carefully.  

Here are the headlines regarding a trial on long-term antibiotics in Lyme disease. 

Alice Park/Time.com: “Treating ‘Chronic’ Lyme with Antibiotics Doesn’t Work: Study.”

Dr. Ambar/healthunits.com: “Antibiotics Prove Useless in Lyme Disease Treatment.”  

 First of all, the writers of the research paper also exaggerated their findings.  So I’m guessing these “writers” did not do any other homework and took the research paper’s writers at their word.  These days, even I know that’s not the best idea.  Since when do reporters do this?  Aren’t they supposed to verify information?  I know not everyone can understand research studies, but there are other ways to find information, say a counterpoint on the study maybe?  There are quite a few out there. 

Not only did the antibiotics used in this study help some patients, the fact it didn’t help them all should not negate using/trying any other antibiotic (or combination) in any patient ever again.  That’s just stupid science. 

So the above-used headlines go further than even the exaggeration of the paper’s authors.  These headlines suggest that antibiotics given to any Lyme patient (or chronic Lyme patient) won’t work (including giving them antibiotics at the start of disease).  Even the paper’s authors disagree with that statement.  I don’t know anyone who ever stated Lyme should never be treated at the beginning of diagnosis. But the headlines suggest this outright.  

The facts are pretty clear when you have been following this disease as long as many have been.  It obviously is not clear to these writers or headline writers.  I can understand this– to a point.  It is a very complex subject even before you get to all the DNA stuff.  But these type of “absolute” headlines and articles about a subject that is far from being understood completely by anyone (yes, even the researchers) is never a good idea. 

The only options available to the writers/websites to explain these headlines is to either admit they wanted to misrepresent the findings of the research or admit they didn’t understand the research.  

Or they could ignore it all and hope neither one of my proposed headlines comes true.  

–Loon Out 

Winona Is The BEST

Some days I forget things.  Even on my best days.  My brain is not as bad as it used to be, but it still gets me in trouble here and there.

Case in point.  Went shopping, and since I am waiting for a replacement debit card (due to fraud on the other one) I have been writing checks.  No problem, right?? Except today I also forgot my driver’s license.  And the store absolutely needed that.  I did try using the other 2 cards I had with me, a prepaid one with very little left on it, and another similar type card that one needs to load–which I had very little left on as well.  Not enough though. 

So a lady behind me in line offered to pay what was left.  I think it was something like $11.  I said I could just come back … But they said it was ok.  I am pretty sure they just really wanted to get me out of there since I was holding up the line by then.  I was going to offer to get her address and stuff to pay her back, but I was pretty sure she just wanted me gone.  I probably should have asked anyway.  At that point, though, I was also trying to figure out where I left my driver’s license. I was pretty sure I put it back in my purse.  Anyway.  Of course it was on my desk.  

You know how your brain gets all full of mush when you are trying to think fast–that is what my brain does all the time.  So I couldn’t really figure out what to do except to say thank you very much, sorry to hold up the line, and skeedaddle. 

Probably she will never see this, but just in case: 

Nothing like Winona and the amazing people who live here! 
— Loon Out