lida-thumb  Dr. Lida Mattman

In this 2006 blast from the past, Dr. Lida Mattman, PhD, and author of “Cell Wall Deficient Forms:  Stealth Pathogens,” states,

“I am convinced that Lyme Disease is transmittable from person to person.”

Mattman has been able to recover live spirochetes of Borrelia burgdorferi (Bb) from mosquitos, fleas, mites, semen, urine, blood, spinal fluid, and tears, indicating the potential to be spread on hands person to person. 

To watch her 2006 presentation:  Transcript included.

In the 90’s, Mattman obtained positive cultures for Bb in 43 out of 47 chronically infected people.  All with Parkinson’s & Alzheimer’s had Bb, and many with MS and ALS had it.

This has been substantiated clinically as well


Quite recently live Bb was found in a genital lesion of a chronically infected female patient:  Key Quote:

“Our findings demonstrate the complexity of Lyme disease,” said Fesler, a lead author of the published study. “It explains why the disease is more common than one would think if only ticks were involved in transmission.”

Why isn’t an alarm being spread throughout the land?
Because this information isn’t new.  It just keeps getting buried and ignored.

Mattman and her colleague, Dr. Joanne Whitaker, a victim of Lyme disease since childhood, developed a direct test for Bb and were the first to identify the cell wall deficient form of the spirochete.  Interestingly, the CDC has made 2-tier blood serology testing for Lyme a literal mandate, purposely avoiding direct detection:

There’s a long & sordid history of serology testing for Lyme:  Excerpt:

It would appear that there has been a deliberate avoidance of direct detection methods and it is believed that these efforts are to insure that the current thirty year dogma remain intact.

We have a dire need to develop rapid detection methods for a serious growing health threat which has the ability to disable its victim as described in the attached letter addressed to the previous Director of the CDC. (Please see attachment in link)

I would like to point out that employees of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control hold patents on metabolomics (Lyme tests).

CDC Employee Patent:

For nearly four decades now the only FDA approved test for Lyme disease is the indirect two-tiered antibody test. Direct detection methods to identify the causative agent responsible for the disease have been avoided, criticized and shelved.  Direct detection laboratory testing (DNA/PCR Sequencing) is used for many infections (Ebola (1), Zika (2), Bartonella (3) etc.) but not Lyme disease.

The shenanigans don’t end there:  Excerpt:

After publishing the 2013 article ‘A simple method for the detection of live Borrelia spirochetes in human blood using classical microscopy techniques’, professor Laane was invited to give a lecture at the 2014 Norvect conference in Oslo. An English patient saved the pdf, so you can still read it, via the link provided.

I was present at that conference and still remember how nervous he was. The reason was that several medical professors complained to his university. He was threatened with losing his job, if he would speak at the conference.

In fact, he did not literally speak – as you can see in the movie below – but used performing arts to show the slides of the spirochetes. Professor Laane was fired anyway and his laboratory was closed down.

According to Lyme patient and advocate Carl Tuttle:
“The CDC is responsible for the current Lyme disease crisis where patients cannot obtain a timely diagnosis through accurate early detection.”
For a great read on Lyme testing:  In this article you will read that most testing for Lyme is indirect.  Serology testing looks for antibodies to the organism. Another great read:
 “These serologic tests cannot distinguish active infection, past infection, or reinfection.”

In plain English, these tests don’t show squat, yet have ruled Lyme-land for 40 years like the Iron Curtain.


For those of you new to this game, the CDC/IDSA/NIH has spread malicious information about smaller labs that specialize in virology and bacteriology and are CLIA certified, one of the toughest certification standards a lab can undergo.  On their website, the CDC has called these labs, “home-brewed.” They control testing by stating it must be FDA approved.  I actually attended a public meeting at the WI capital where a pediatric doctor quoted right off the CDC website and called the IgeneX Lyme test, “Home-brewed.”

“Often these are laboratory-developed tests (also known as “home brew” tests) that are manufactured and used within a single laboratory and have not been cleared or approved by FDA. Recently, CDC has received inquiries regarding a laboratory-developed test that uses a novel culture method to identify Borrelia burgdorferi, the spirochete that causes Lyme disease. Patient specimens reportedly are incubated using a two-step pre-enrichment process, followed by immunostaining with or without polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis. Specimens that test positive by immunostaining or PCR are deemed “culture positive” (2). Published methods and results for this laboratory-developed test have been reviewed by CDC. The review raised serious concerns about false-positive results caused by laboratory contamination and the potential for misdiagnosis (3).  CDC recommends that laboratory tests cleared or approved by FDA be used to aid in the routine diagnosis of Lyme disease. A complete searchable list of such tests is available online (4).”

I can only guess what it costs a lab to go through the FDA process. Let’s just say these small specialty labs have had it rough.  They have fought tooth and nail just to keep their doors open.

Besides requiring FDA approval, the CDC has also arbitrarily set the criteria of requiring  5 out of 10 bands for a positive test result.

According to Dr. Waisbren, an IDSA founder, in his illuminating book, “Treatment of Chronic Lyme Disease: 51 Case Reports and Essays in Their Regard,” he states,

“The Western Blot studies, which are essentially antibody studies, do seem to be the most positive finding in clinical Lyme disease, but setting an arbitrary level of these antibodies to diagnose a disease that has not been amenable to Koch’s postulates seems open to question.  By the same token, ignoring antibody results unless they meet arbitrary levels seems suspect.  The vast majority of patients in this series showed some Western blot antibody exposure, but many did not meet the arbitrary limits set.”  

And then wisely states,

“We all must remember that in our preset state of knowledge, the diagnosis of Lyme disease is a clinical one.”

This was all written in 2011, yet the only FDA “approved” testing is STILL the abysmal and arbitrary 2-tiered blood serology which only detects antibodies to the organism.

One gets the distinct feeling the CDC wants to control how many patients are accurately diagnosed.
Oh, and also collect money on tests they have patents on.

Little to no work has been done on the transmission of the organism.  Animal studies and the warnings of experienced microbiologists on the potential of human to human transmission since the 80’s have been completely ignored.  Even Canada has recognized congenital transmission:, largely because a group of women led by a nurse with congenitally infected children pushed the point and collected 33 years of data showing it:

Here’s another example of work done way back in the 80’s which found Bb in a baby which died during the first week of life due to congenital heart disease which found Bb in the spleen, kidneys, and bone marrow.  The mother developed Lyme during the 1st trimester:

Do we seriously have to battle a chronic illness and keep doing ALL the work by ourselves?

The best description I’ve heard is that Lyme is a, “do it yourself” disease. Very accurate description.

For more on ancient animal studies showing various transmission routes:

Until these issues are fully and transparently dealt with, we can spray and check for ticks all the day long but still not address the very practical issue of other ways people are getting infected.

Lida H Mattman, PhD, has spent seven decades studying the different forms that bacteria can take. Her contributions to medical science can be summarized best by noting that in 1998 she was nominated for the highest honor attainable in her profession: The Nobel Prize in Medicine. Professor Mattman graduated with a M.S. in Virology from Univ. of Kansas and a Ph.D. in Immunology from Yale. She has taught Immunology, Microbiology, Bacteriology, Virology, Pathology, and for 35 years worked in these fields at various schools and institutions including Harvard Univ., Howard Hughes Institute, Oakland Univ. and Wayne State Univ. where she is Professor Emeritus. She is currently working for the Nelson Medical Research Institute studying the relationship between spirochetes involved in MS, Lyme disease, and ALS.

%d bloggers like this: