The ‘Tick Act’ should aid fight against Lyme disease, but will Congress pass it?

JUN 12, 2019 — 

Today’s letter to Rep Smith with Cc: to the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group.

Lyme Bumper Stickers (Public Service Announcement)


——— Original Message ———-
Cc:  (97 Undisclosed Recipients)
Date: June 12, 2019 at 8:51 AM
Subject: The ‘Tick Act’ should aid fight against Lyme disease, but will Congress pass it?

The ‘Tick Act’ should aid fight against Lyme disease, but will Congress pass it?

Jerry Carino, Asbury Park Press June 11, 2019

June 12, 2019

U.S. Congressman Chris Smith
2373 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Rep. Smith,

Is there a provision within the Tick Act to restrict research funds from the con artists who have characterized Lyme as a simple nuisance disease (Hard to catch and easily treated)?

Like untreated strep throat, Lyme has the ability to ruin lives with irreversible damage all of which has been hidden from the public for the past forty years as Lyme has been portrayed as hard to catch and easily treated with a one-size-fits-all IDSA treatment guideline.

The one-size-fits-all IDSA treatment guideline does not scratch the surface for a Borrelia infection misdiagnosed and untreated for years or decades and up to two-thirds of individuals infected with B. burgdorferi will fail conventional 30-year-old antibiotic therapy for Lyme disease. [1] This growing class of Lyme patient has been ignored by the CDC, IDSA and American Lyme Disease Foundation as the focus has always been on the acute stage of Lyme disease with bulls-eye rash after early treatment. [2]Patients who fail treatment are kicked to the curb and told they have “Medically Unexplained Symptoms” [3] while ignoring the large body of evidence that we have been dealing all along with an antibiotic resistant/tolerant superbug. [4]

Quote from Dr. Willy Burgdorfer: “The controversy in Lyme disease research is a shameful affair. And I say that because the whole thing is politically tainted. Money goes to people who have, for the past 30 years, produced the same thing—nothing. [5]

Previous NIH funding for Lyme was under the direction of Edward McSweegan and Philip Baker. Corrective action: The NIH should suspend all funding to researchers with a bias against persistent Borrelia infection particularly those who have been named in the Texas racketeering lawsuit [6] who continue to use taxpayer dollars to fund their ongoing racketeering/propaganda scheme.

There needs to be an immediate shutdown of the “open checkbook” handed to Dr. Gary Wormser by the US Centers for Disease Control (Funding: RO1 CK 000152) with his unethical fixation on the acute stage of disease purposely avoiding the advanced stage which hides the horribly disabled.

Complaint filed with the Office of Research Integrity:

Here is the short list of con artists who were also coauthors of the deplorable Lancet article, Lyme disease antiscience. [7]

Defendants in the RICO lawsuit: (There are many more researchers to be included in this short list)







Put an end to the favoritism in research funding for Lyme at the NIH or are we going to experience yet another decade of unimaginable pain and suffering.

Respectfully submitted,

Carl Tuttle

Lyme Endemic Hudson, NH


1. Lyme disease: the promise of Big Data, companion diagnostics and precision medicine

2. Subjective symptoms after treatment of early Lyme disease(WORMSER)

3. Eugene Shapiro, MD, on suspected Lyme disease

4. 700 Citations- Persistent Lyme Disease

5. Prof. Willy Burgdorfer Talks About Lyme Disease

6. Texas racketeering lawsuit

7. Lyme disease antiscience



Tuttle raises a solid point – that the SAME researchers are given tax dollars to continue the SAME research on the acute phase with very strict parameters as entrance into the study (have to have EM rash & test positive on their abysmal serology testing)

And in the words of Burgdorfer: “Money goes to people who have, for the past 30 years, produced the same thing—nothing.” [5]

The other glaring issue with mainstream research is they have rarely if ever discussed concurrent infection, which is the reality for thousands and thousands of patients:

We even know ticks are coinfected with numerous things. It only follows they will transmit these things to us:

  • 76% of ticks tested have at least one disease causing organism
  • 49% are co-infected with two or more organisms
  • 20% carry three or more
  • 9% of the ticks tested carry four or more  Concurrent infection within ticks most probably allows for quicker transmission times to humans.  Something that isn’t being touched with a 10-foot pole.

Nobody has a bead on what a patient looks like who has 2 or more tick-borne illnesses. They continue to push this into a 2 minute sound bite.