Archive for the ‘Anaplasmosis’ Category

Know Your Ticks

Know your ticks

Easy to read table shows the most common ticks found in the U.S. that transmit pathogens to humans.
Note: only a partial list. To learn more about tick-bite prevention and how to be Tick AWARE, click here

Click here to download the Tick Table

Tick Table

For more:

Remember, in Wisconsin, ticks are found in every county in the state. Researchers are also finding them in bright, open, mowed lawns.

Statewide Passive Surveillance of Black Legged Ticks & Associated Pathogens in Maine

Statewide Passive Surveillance of Ixodes scapularis and Associated Pathogens in Maine

Published Online:


The blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis, is the primary vector of multiple human pathogens, including the causative agents of Lyme disease, anaplasmosis, and babesiosis. Both I. scapularis and its associated pathogens have expanded their geographic range throughout the northeastern Unites States and into northern New England. Through this study, we present an updated distribution of I. scapularis in Maine and report the first statewide passive surveillance infection and coinfection prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferiAnaplasma phagocytophilum, and Babesia microti within the state’s I. scapularis population. In 2019, we collected 2016 ticks through a passive surveillance program, in which Maine residents submitted tick samples for identification and/or pathogen testing. We used a single multiplex quantitative PCR assay to detect tickborne pathogens in 1901 tick samples. At the state level, we found:

  • Bo. burgdorferi and A. phagocytophilum infection rates of adults (42.4%, 11.1%) were nearly double that of nymphs (26.9%, 6.7%)
  • B. microti prevalence was similar for both adults (6.5%) and nymphs (5.2%).
  • Spatially, we found an uneven distribution of both tick activity and pathogen prevalence, with both increasing on a north to south gradient.
  • We also noted a potential association between the ratio of adult to nymphal ticks and the incidence of tickborne disease in human populations, with counties that exhibit high rates of human disease also maintaining low adult to nymph ratios.
  • We detected Bo. burgdorferi in ticks from all counties, except Aroostook, although we only tested five samples from this county.
  • Excluding Aroostook, the county-level Bo. burgdorferi prevalence ranged from 30.0% (Piscataquis) to 50.0% (Franklin and Waldo) in adults and 0% (Piscataquis and Somerset) to 43.8% (Knox) in nymphs.
  • High disease incidence counties did not necessarily have higher prevalence rates within submitted ticks.
  • Knowledge of anaplasmosis is not as widespread as Lyme disease, which may lead to the underdiagnosis of this disease.
  • The sporadic distribution of B. microti is consistent with a pathogen that is colonizing a new location and has not yet reached an even spatial distribution (Diuk-Wasser et al. 2016).
  • B. microti is also thought to spread more quickly in areas where Bo. burgdorferi is prevalent due to an immune interaction in reservoir hosts such as white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) or deer mice (P. maniculatus) (Dunn et al. 2014).
  • B. microti is likely to continue spreading throughout Maine.



It is interesting that researchers acknowledge that multiple infections occur due to an immune interaction yet severely ill patients are still viewed myopically to only have Lyme disease.  Our conflict-riddled public health ‘authorities’ continue to promote ancient mythology, deny persistent infection, and treat patients with a mono-therapy that has never been adequate.  Treating co-infections isn’t even on their radar.

Need for Tick Bite Reporting in Non-Endemic States

Tick-Borne Surveillance Patterns in Perceived Non-Endemic Geographic Areas: Human Tick Encounters and Disease Outcomes

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Raphael B. Stricker
Healthcare 20219(6), 771;
Received: 12 May 2021 / Revised: 15 June 2021 / Accepted: 16 June 2021 / Published: 21 June 2021
Recent scholarship supports the use of tick bite encounters as a proxy for human disease risk. Extending entomological monitoring, this study was designed to provide geographically salient information on self-reported tick bite encounters by survey respondents who concomitantly reported a Lyme disease (LD) diagnosis in a state perceived as non-endemic to tick-borne illness. Focusing on Texas, a mixed-methods approach was used to compare data on tick bite encounters from self-reported LD patients with county-level confirmed cases of LD from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as well as serological canine reports.
A greater proportion of respondents reported not recalling a tick bite in the study population, but a binomial test indicated that this difference was not statistically significant. A secondary analysis compared neighboring county-level data and ecological regions.
Using multi-layer thematic mapping, our findings indicated that tick bite reports accurately overlapped with the geographic patterns of those patients previously known to be CDC-positive for serological LD and with canine-positive tests for Borrelia burgdorferi, anaplasmosis, and ehrlichiosis, as well as within neighboring counties and ecological regions. LD patient-reported tick bite encounters, corrected for population density, also accurately aligned with official CDC county hot-spots. Given the large number of counties in Texas, these findings are notable.
Overall, the study demonstrates that direct, clinically diagnosed patient reports with county-level tick bite encounter data offer important public health surveillance measures, particularly as it pertains to difficult-to-diagnose diseases where testing protocols may not be well established. Further integration of geo-ecological and socio-demographic factors with existing national epidemiological data, as well as increasingly accessible self-report methods such as online surveys, will contribute to the contextual information needed to organize and implement a coordinated public health response to LD.
Important excerpts:
  • Primary care physicians may under-diagnose LD in areas perceived as non-endemic [33].
  • Misdiagnosis was reported in seventy-two percent of respondents in a large survey [34], indicating the need for improved surveillance beyond entomology that links tick encounters with human disease risk, which can inform diagnostic approaches.
  • The need for expanded and improved LD research and knowledge is highly apparent for the benefit of both patients and health practitioners.
  • Given that LD is often labeled a “contested illness,” TTS respondents who may be perceived as “faking it” could easily report any random county if their tick bites were indeed a false entry in the TTS survey. In other words, it would be highly unlikely that the totality of respondents’ tick bite reports would map directly to confirmed official CDC cases or canine serological findings through attempted deception. TTS-reported tick bites overlap almost exactly with CDC-confirmed LD cases in county-level and eco-region analyses. In one case, in a county in which TTS respondents did not overlap with human cases, tick encounter reports did overlap with a positive canine county.
You know it’s bad when researchers have to deal with the myth that patients are considered deceivers.

Tick Season 2021: Why Researchers Are Focusing on Staten Island Backyards

Tick season 2021: Here’s why researchers are focusing on Staten Island backyards

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. — For the last four years, researchers from Columbia University have been studying the rise in tick populations and Lyme disease on Staten Island — and the work continues this summer as they drag for ticks, set up hair traps and place trail cameras in residents’ backyards.

The researchers are studying both parks and residential areas to better understand the ecology of ticks and the risk of tick-transmitted diseases in urban environments. And ticks are now being found across all of Staten Island, not just in the southernmost parts.

Most notably, the Asian longhorned tick continues to spread across the borough.

(See link for article)



For more on Diuk-Wasser’s work.

Dr. Burrascano on Tick-borne Illness Testing

http://  Approx. 15 Min

IGeneX 2021 Presentation Wisconsin Naturopathic Doctors Association (WNDA)

May 10, 2021

See Dr. Joseph Burrascano presenting on behalf of IGeneX Laboratory at the annual WNDA conference. Topics cover testing for Lyme Disease, Tick-Borne Relapsing Fever, Bartonella, Babesia, Rickettsia, Anaplasma, and Ehrlichia.

Dr. Burrascano discusses the Lyme ImmunoBlot test for early Lyme, validated with CDC test samples, that will identify 93% of cases.

He discussed a 2018 study of over 10,000 patient samples from nearly every state which found patients testing positive for the following pathogens:

  • nearly 38% for Babesia
  • 32% for Lyme borrelia
  • nearly 28% for TBRF borrelia
  • 19% for Bartonella
  • nearly 17% for Anaplasma
  • nearly 13% for Rickettsia
  • nearly 7% for Ehrlichia


  • 40% tested positive for 2 pathogens
  • 15% for 3
  • 4.6% for 4
  • 0.7% for 5