Current serology is no better than a coin toss

MAR 31, 2021 — 

Please see the letter below addressed to the Chair of the NH Lyme Disease Study Commission in reference to a presentation from our last Zoom meeting.

You can hear/see my arguments at 1:01 in the recorded YouTube video link below.

———- Original Message ———-
To: William Marsh <> CHAIR
Cc: All members of the study group
Date: 03/31/2021 8:59 AM
Subject: Topic for discussion at our next meeting (Dr. Martin’s Presentation)

I would like to add the following letter of concern as a topic for discussion at our next meeting and have copied all committee members so they can review the document prior to the meeting. 

Please reserve any discussion of these documents until our next scheduled Zoom meeting.

To members of the Lyme Study Commission,

Dear Rep Marsh,
I have some serious concerns regarding Dr. Martin’s informative presentation last Friday.

In reference to the 2013 C6 Elisa paper from Dr. Wormser, [1] this test is not widely used here in the US for the detection of Borrelia infections. When performing a search on the Quest Diagnostics website, I could not find the C6 Elisa listed as an option for Lyme disease.

Furthermore, test performance from that 2013 Wormser paper and 2018 pegalajar-jurado et al publication [2] was derived through the use of serum samples from patients who had the positive marker for Lyme; erythema migrans (bulls-eye rash) so testing results for the newer serology were positive because they were already positive. There was no performance data for those who never developed the bulls-eye rash. Once again this is misleading to the reader and highly inaccurate in real-world application. (what front line physicians are experiencing) Maine Department of Health is reporting incidence of rash at only 50%. So, half of the patient population is not being represented in these studies. That is a serious concern.
To my knowledge, the Modified Two-Tiered Testing Algorithm (MTTTA) is not in use outside of Dr. Martin’s lab and irrelevant to our study commission at this time so any performance numbers offered by Dr. Martin are meaningless. Until such time that these newer tests are fully implemented (if ever) performance characteristics should not be acknowledged or posted in the minutes of the Lyme Study Commission.

Although current testing methods are evolving, we are still using the conventional WCS ELISA–immunoblot-based 2-tier testing algorithm. Dr. Durand (ILADS physician) and I have provided documentation supporting the fact that current serology is no better than a coin toss and this fact must be shared with the public along with the fact that humans do not produce antibodies for 4-6 weeks after a tick bite.

Here are the missing disclaimers:

1. “Health-care providers are reminded that a diagnosis of Lyme disease should be made after evaluation of a patient’s clinical presentation and risk for exposure to infected ticks, and, if indicated, after the use of validated laboratory tests.

2. “This surveillance case definition (two of three IgM and Five of ten IgG bands) was developed for national reporting of Lyme disease; it is not intended to be used in clinical diagnosis”

Respectfully submitted,

Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH


1. Single-tier testing with the C6 peptide ELISA kit compared with two-tier testing for Lyme disease

2. Evaluation of Modified Two-Tiered Testing Algorithms for Lyme Disease Laboratory Diagnosis Using Well-Characterized Serum Samples


For more:

There has been a concerted effort by ‘authoritie’s against direct testing. 

The simple reason for this is our public health ‘authorities’ have patents on Lyme testing.

They also want us to take their controversial Lyme vaccines which would only work if Lyme disease does not cause chronic illness – hence the denial of persistent infection.  Our public authorities also have conflicts of interests regarding these vaccines.

The CDC is not to be trusted at all.  

We need to stop working with these agencies and raising money for their flawed, biased science that continues to abuse and neglect sick patients.


%d bloggers like this: