Archive for the ‘Lyme’ Category

ACTION: Breaking the Chains on Foods That Heal

https://anh-usa.org/action-alert-breaking-the-chains-on-foods-that-heal/

Breaking the Chains on Foods That Heal

Breaking the Chains on Foods That Heal

ANH-USA has released a ground-breaking Strategic Roadmap and Action Plan exposing how outdated FDA rules are blocking access to medical foods—science-based nutrition therapies that could help millions of Americans prevent, manage, and even reverse chronic disease. Our Action Plan shows how we’re going to fix it. It’s time to educate Congress: sign our Action Alert now!


THE TOPLINE

  • America is facing a chronic disease crisis, yet FDA rules restrict access to medical foods—nutrition-based therapies designed to meet the special dietary needs of people with diagnosed health conditions.
  • By treating these foods like drugs, FDA policy has stifled innovation, discouraged research, and cut off patients from affordable, safe, and effective nutrition-based care.
  • ANH-USA’s roadmap lays out how to modernize medical food policy, broaden access, and bring the “food is medicine” vision to life.

A Healthcare System That’s Failing Us

Despite spending over 16% of our GDP on healthcare—more than any other country—the United States ranks a shocking 80th in healthy life expectancy, projected to fall even further by 2050. Today, 133 million Americans live with at least one chronic disease, and 42% have two or more.

How can a nation that spends so much on health be so sick? Because we’ve built a healthcare system that waits for people to get sick—and then treats them with drugs that are expensive, dangerous, and do not address the root cause of illness in the first place.

There’s a better way.

>>>Download ANH-USA Strategic Roadmap and Action Plan, Medical Foods: Unlocking Access and Value

The Untapped Power of Medical Foods

Medical foods (MFs) are specially formulated products that provide targeted nutrition for people whose dietary needs cannot be met by regular foods alone. They’re used in hospitals every day, often in the form of shakes, powders, or enteral (feeding tube) formulas for patients recovering from surgery, living with metabolic disorders, or managing chronic disease.

Medical foods can help underserved populations reduce age-related disease and chronic conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and arthritis, improving health while reducing healthcare costs. They’re safe, effective, and far less expensive than many branded drugs.

So why don’t more Americans have access to them?

The Problem: A System Rigged Against Nutrition

Medical foods are trapped inside an outdated legal framework. In 1988, Congress created the medical food category in the Orphan Drug Act—a law meant to encourage the development of drugs for rare diseases.

Current rules say medical foods can only be used under a doctor’s supervision—even though most physicians receive very little training in nutrition. Meanwhile, qualified nutrition professionals like Certified Nutrition Specialists and Registered Dietitians are shut out from helping patients access these lifesaving foods.

The FDA’s interpretation of the law is so narrow that medical foods are completely shut out from addressing common chronic conditions like diabetes, heart disease, and metabolic syndrome, even though nutrition is central to their management. In its guidance document, for example, the FDA states, “There are no distinctive nutritional requirements associated with the management of [diabetes],” so medical foods cannot target diabetes.

Making matters worse, medical foods are often denied insurance reimbursement because FDA policy has left their prescription status in limbo. This is critical: our healthcare system mostly runs on insurance reimbursement. But because of the FDA’s restrictive rules, medical foods are left out of that system. As a result, most doctors and patients don’t even know these products exist—and when they do ask for them, insurance almost always refuses to cover the cost. By effectively hiding a whole category of safe, affordable nutrition-based treatments, the system blocks competition and discourages companies from investing in this promising area of medical science.

>>>Download ANH-USA Strategic Roadmap and Action Plan, Medical Foods: Unlocking Access and Value

In short: the FDA has put medical foods in handcuffs for decades while we’ve been seeing increasing rates of chronic disease that are nutrition and lifestyle related. This is crony medicine at its finest: shut out natural, nutrition-based interventions in favor of pharmaceutical monopolies over disease treatment.

Our Solution: A Roadmap for Reform

ANH-USA’s Strategic Roadmap and Action Plan offers a clear, actionable plan to fix this broken system. We’re calling for a modern framework that empowers innovation and restores nutrition to its rightful place in medicine.

Key recommendations include:

  • Modernize the definition. Update the statutory language so medical foods can address common chronic diseases, not just rare ones.
  • Expand access and supervision. Allow qualified nutrition professionals—not just doctors—to oversee medical food use.
  • Clarify prescription status and enable reimbursement. Give medical foods a clear path to coverage through Medicare, Medicaid, the Veterans Administration, and private insurers.
  • Replace regulatory intimidation with guidance. End the warning-letter culture and provide transparent, science-based rules for innovation.
  • Educate healthcare professionals. Integrate medical nutrition training into medical, nursing, dietetic, and pharmacy schools nationwide.

These changes would unleash innovation, bring competition and lower prices, and expand patient access to safe, proven, food-based therapies.

Why It Matters

Medical foods won’t replace drugs—but they can reduce the need for them. By addressing the nutritional roots of disease, medical foods can help people stay healthier, longer, while saving billions in healthcare costs.

It’s time to bring “food as medicine from rhetoric to reality.

Action Alert!

(Go to top link to take action)

For more:

The importance of nutrition with Lyme/MSIDS:

The power of fasting:

Navigating Disability Insurance for Lyme Disease

https://www.lymedisease.org/navigating-disability-insurance/

Navigating disability insurance for Lyme disease

By Edward Dabdoub

10/22/25

Lyme disease can cause serious and lasting impairments that make it impossible to work full-time.

Yet, because symptoms of Lyme disease are typically subjective, or self-reported, insurance companies tend to question the legitimacy of Lyme-related claims.

Oftentimes, disability insurance companies will deny long term disability (LTD) claims because there is no standard testing to prove impairment caused by ongoing symptoms.

If you are unable to work due to the ongoing impact of Lyme disease and your doctors agree you should stop working, you may be eligible for LTD insurance benefits.

Disability insurance coverage provided by an employer is usually governed by a federal law called ERISA. This law has specific requirements for submitting a short-term and long-term claim and appealing a denied claim.

It is important to obtain a copy of the short-term and long-term disability insurance policies from your employer to understand what is necessary for the claim or appeal and by when it is due. Deadlines are very strict in ERISA disability claims. A missed deadline could prevent you from pursuing the claim further.

Symptoms

Common symptoms and complications of Lyme disease that prevent people from working may include:

  • Chronic fatigue
  • Severe joint or muscle pain
  • Cognitive issues like memory loss or “brain fog”
  • Vision problems
  • Sleep disturbances
  • Mood changes, including anxiety and depression

When symptoms last for an extended period, they can interfere with your ability to perform your job duties consistently. It is at that point you may need to look into your disability insurance coverage through work or even individually (if you took out a disability insurance policy previously).

Challenges when filing for LTD benefits 

Insurance companies are notoriously skeptical of Lyme disease disability claims, especially if:

  • Your symptoms are self-reported, such as chronic fatigue, pain, or cognitive impairments.
  • You do not have a confirmed positive Lyme test.
  • You are not treating with an infectious disease specialist or a specialist in Lyme Disease.
  • Your medical records do not clearly demonstrate your restrictions and limitations.

One of the most important aspects of a disability insurance claim, especially for a condition like Lyme disease, is to ensure you are being treated regularly by doctors, and that your doctors are supportive of your disability.

You will need their support when completing paperwork and throughout the duration of your LTD claim and benefit payments. It is important they also maintain detailed medical records of your ongoing symptoms, their observations of pain or fatigue or brain fog, and any abnormal exam findings.

Disability insurance companies will scrutinize your medical records looking for inconsistencies or lack of detail as to how your symptoms impact your functionality. Some commons bases for long term disability claim denials include:

  • Claiming Your Symptoms Are “Subjective” – Disability insurers argue issues like fatigue or brain fog can’t be proven with standard tests.
  • Doubting the Diagnosis – Denials are common when no antibody testing confirms Lyme disease.
  • Discrediting Your Doctors – Disability insurers rely on their own consultants to undermine your treating physicians.
  • Minimizing Your Limitations – Disability insurers point to basic daily tasks (cooking, driving) or surveillance footage to argue you can still work.

What you will need to support your claim

Getting approved for LTD benefits for Lyme disease requires strong, consistent medical and non-medical evidence that corroborates your reported symptoms and bolsters your credibility. The following is a brief list of things you may want to gather as part of your LTD claim or appeal:

  • Thorough Medical Documentation – Ensure your providers document your diagnosis, testing, and daily impact of symptoms.
  • Functional Capacity Evaluations (FCEs) – Independent tests measuring work-related abilities (sitting, standing, walking, typing).
  • Neuropsychological Testing – Objective evidence of memory, concentration, or cognitive issues.
  • Symptom Log – Daily tracking showing fluctuation, triggers, and impact on functioning.
  • Personal and 3rd party statements – Your own account plus input from family/friends describing struggles and changes.

Fighting for long term disability insurance benefits due to Lyme disease can be frustrating, but there is hope. With strong support from your treating providers, detailed medical records, and evidence demonstrating your restrictions and limitations, disability insurance companies have approved these claims. If you have questions or concerns about your claim, you should reach out to a disability insurance attorney who can guide you on how best to handle your claim.

Edward Dabdoub is the founder and managing partner of the Dabdoub Law Firm, a national practice that specializes in long-term disability insurance claims.

For more:

 

ACTION: Retract Deplorable Lyme Disease CME Which Ignores Persistent Bb Part 2

https://www.change.org/p/the-us-senate-calling-for-a-congressional-investigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/34014349?cs_tk=A8-

Medscape Now! Interprofessional Care of Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome (Part2)

Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH, United States
Oct 28, 2025

Follow-up email to Adrian Duncan, Group Vice President, Global Head of Education & Medical Affairs at WebMD.

First email can be found here.

———- Original Message ———-
From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: “aduncan@webmd.net” <aduncan@webmd.net>
Cc: “cme@medscape.net” <cme@medscape.net>, “caitlin@medlitera.com” <caitlin@medlitera.com>, “naseem@medlitera.com” <naseem@medlitera.com>, “michelle@medlitera.com” <michelle@medlitera.com>
Date: 10/28/2025 9:28 AM EDT
Subject: Re: Medscape Now! Understanding the Latest Evidence and Best Practices for Interprofessional Care of Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome

Dear Mr. Duncan,

In 2016 Dr. Paul Auwaerter, past president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America coauthored a study revealing the persister form of Borrelia burgdorferi resistant to antibiotics.

Here is a timeline of events:

2015

Standard antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease does not kill persistent Borrelia bacteria.
http://droopyyoupi.blogspot.com/2015/08/standart-antibiotic-treatment-for-lyme.html

Excerpt:

What has tuberculosis and Borrelia burgdorferi in common? In the late stage of the disease occurs persistent (tolerant) bacteria, which essentially means that the bacteria lasts and lasts and lasts. They protect themselves against antibiotics and are difficult to treat.

Both Borrelia burgdorferi and tuberculosis is relatively easy to cure in the early stages, even with the use of one antibiotic. In the late stage it is impossible to cure the disease with the same type of treatment in the acute phase, said Dr. Ying Zhang when he visited the year NorVect conference.

-Dr. Ying Zhang is a professor at the Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Two days after NorVect conference, published Dr. Ying Zhang’s latest research Identification of new compounds with high activity against stationary phase Borrelia burgdorferi from the NCI compound collection.

2016

A Drug Combination Screen Identifies Drugs Active against Amoxicillin-Induced Round Bodies of In Vitro Borrelia burgdorferi Persisters from an FDA Drug Library
Jie Feng 1, Wanliang Shi 1, Shuo Zhang 1, David Sullivan 1, Paul G Auwaerter 2, Ying Zhang 1
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27242757/

Abstract

Under experimental stress conditions such as starvation or antibiotic exposure, Borrelia burgdorferi can develop round body forms, which are a type of persister bacteria that appear resistant in vitro to customary first-line antibiotics for Lyme disease. To identify more effective drugs with activity against the round body form of B. burgdorferi, we established a round body persister model induced by exposure to amoxicillin (50 μg/ml) and then screened the Food and Drug Administration drug library consisting of 1581 drug compounds and also 22 drug combinations using the SYBR Green I/propidium iodide viability assay. We identified 23 drug candidates that have higher activity against the round bodies of B. burgdorferi than either amoxicillin or doxycycline.

2022

Nitroxoline Drug Combinations Are More Active Than Lyme Antibiotic Combination and Can Eradicate Stationary-Phase Borrelia burgdorferi
Alvarez-Manzo, Hector S.1; Zhang, Yumin1; Zhang, Ying2,✉
https://journals.lww.com/imd/fulltext/2022/09000/nitroxoline_drug_combinations_are_more_active_than.7.aspx

Abstract

Lyme disease (LD), caused by Borrelia burgdorferi, is the most common vector-borne disease in the United States and Europe. Despite the standard 2–4 weeks’ antibiotic treatment, approximately 10%–20% of patients will develop post treatment LD syndrome, a condition that is poorly understood. One of the probable causes is thought to be the presence of B. burgdorferi persister forms that are not effectively killed by the current LD antibiotics. In this study, we evaluated nitroxoline, an antibiotic used to treat urinary tract infections, for its activity against a stationary-phase culture enriched with persister forms of B. burgdorferi. Nitroxoline was found to be more active than doxycycline and equally active as cefuroxime (standard LD antibiotics) against B. burgdorferi. Importantly, the nitroxoline two-drug combinations nitroxoline + cefuroxime and nitroxoline + clarithromycin, as well as the nitroxoline three-drug combination nitroxoline + cefuroxime + clarithromycin, were as effective as the persister drug daptomycin-based positive control three-drug combination cefuroxime + doxycycline + daptomycin, completely eradicating stationary-phase B. burgdorferi in the drug-exposure experiments and preventing regrowth in the subculture study. Future studies should evaluate these promising drug combinations in a persistent LD mouse model.
 
Mr. Duncan…. This is the missing research that should have been conducted early in the discovery phase of the disease but as we now know, all the eggs were put into the vaccine basket while a campaign was orchestrated to discredit the sick and disabled patient population along with the courageous clinicians attempting to help these patients. What has been deceitfully established here in the US is wreaking havoc globally. Example: Lyme disease: Australians ‘being treated worse than a dog riddled with mange’, Senator John Madigan says
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-11/lyme-disease-treatment-in-australia-criticised-by-john-madigan/7080708

This research is being suppressed as the disabled Lyme patient population around the globe remain sick indefinitely. (Three decades and counting)

Carl Tuttle

______________

**Comment**

We should all be eternally grateful for Lyme patient and advocate Carl Tuttle who is like a dog with a bone when it comes to relentlessly fighting for patients.  His letter makes numerous salient points completely ignored by the medical machine which runs on ‘consensus’ based medicine auto-pilot, where doctors are nothing more than automatons and where AI is more likely to diagnose patients than doctors.

In part one he calls on patients to write letters to Adrian Duncan of Medscape/WebMD.  The medical machine needs to hear from people who live this experience.  For ideas, feel free to read the letter I wrote back in 2020 to the TBDWG which I adapted for the Medscape letter. Use your own experience and ask him to retract this harmful CME course for doctors which only entrenches the false narrative of Lyme/MSIDS.

Landmark Study: Vaccination is the Dominant Risk Factor For Autism

UPDATE:

Go here to listen to Nicolas Hulscher and Dr. Andrew Wakefield discuss the landmark autism report.

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/breaking-landmark-report-finds-vaccination?

BREAKING — Landmark Report Finds Vaccination Is the Dominant Risk Factor for Autism Spectrum Disorder

McCullough Foundation’s authoritative analysis of more than 300 studies provides the most comprehensive synthesis to date on the possible causes of autism.

For decades, scientists have debated what drives the relentless rise in autism. Some have claimed it’s due to “increased screening” while others declare it’s anything but vaccines. Thousands of studies have explored genetic, environmental, and perinatal factors—but very few have ever examined vaccine and non-vaccine determinants together within a unified analytical framework.

Now, the landmark McCullough Foundation Report titled, Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder, provides the most comprehensive synthesis on the possible causes of autism to-date. Thanks to the tireless work of Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, John S. Leake, MA, Simon Troupe, MPH, Claire Rogers, MSPAS, PA-C, Kirstin Cosgrove, BM, CCRA, M. Nathaniel Mead, MSc, PhD, Bre Craven, PA-C, Mila Radetich, Andrew Wakefield, MBBS, and Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH — and support from the Bia-Echo Foundation — this historic effort was made possible.

Our report represents a major breakthrough through the iron grip of censorship imposed by the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex on the issue of vaccination and autism. It also marks Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s first major return to the scientific literature in years—after enduring years of irrational attacks from the vaccine cartel.

By systematically integrating more than 300 studies across epidemiologic, clinical, mechanistic, and molecular domains, our team delivers the most extensive mapping yet of autism’s multifactorial origins and opens a new line of inquiry into how environmental and iatrogenic exposures intersect with genetic susceptibility.

By evaluating all known risk factors side by side, this analysis uniquely clarifies the relative contribution of vaccination compared to genetic and environmental domains. No prior review has attempted this integrative scope without excluding positive vaccine-association studies or unvaccinated controls—an essential step in determining whether vaccines truly play a role in autism risk, and if so, how significant that role is within the broader causal landscape.

Here’s what we found as described in the Abstract:

Introduction: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is now estimated to affect more than 1 in 31 children in the United States, with prevalence rising sharply over the past two decades and posing an increasing burden to families and public health systems. Most of the literature on ASD characterizes it as a complex neurodevelopmental condition shaped by multiple determinants, including genetic liability, immune dysregulation, perinatal stressors, and environmental toxicants. Since 1996, the possible role of childhood vaccination has also been discussed and debated. This review synthesizes the full range of evidence to clarify both vaccine-related and non-vaccine contributors to ASD risk.

Methods: We comprehensively examined epidemiologic, clinical, and mechanistic studies evaluating potential ASD risk factors, assessing outcomes, exposure quantification, strength and independence of associations, temporal relationships, internal and external validity, overall cohesiveness, and biological plausibility.

Results: We found potential determinants of new onset ASD before the age of 9 years old to include: older parents (>35 years mother, >40 years father), premature delivery before 37 weeks of gestation, common genetic variants, siblings with autism, maternal immune activation, in utero drug exposure, environmental toxicants, gut-brain axis alterations and combination routine childhood vaccination. These diverse genetic, environmental, and iatrogenic factors appear to intersect through shared pathways of immune dysregulation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and neuroinflammation, culminating in neurodevelopmental injury and regression in susceptible children. Of 136 studies examining childhood vaccines or their excipients, 29 found neutral risks or no association, while 107 inferred a possible link between immunization or vaccine components and ASD or other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), based on findings spanning epidemiologic, clinical, mechanistic, neuropathologic, and case-report evidence of developmental regression. 12 studies comparing routinely immunized versus completely unvaccinated children or young adults consistently demonstrated superior overall health outcomes among the unvaccinated, including significantly lower risks of chronic medical problems and neuropsychiatric disorders such as ASD. The neutral association papers were undermined by absence of a genuinely unvaccinated control group—with partial or unverified immunization even among those classified as unvaccinated—alongside registry misclassification, ecological confounding, and averaged estimates that obscure effects within vulnerable subgroups. Only a few case–control studies verified vaccination through medical records or parent-held cards, and none performed independent clinical assessments of the children for ASD. In contrast, the positive association studies found both population signals (ecologic, cohort, case–control, dose–response, and temporal clustering) and mechanistic findings converging on biologic plausibility: antigen, preservative, and adjuvant (ethyl mercury and aluminum) induced mitochondrial and neuroimmune dysfunction, central nervous system injury, and resultant incipient phenotypic expression of ASD. Clustered vaccine dosing and earlier timing of exposure during critical neurodevelopmental windows appeared to increase the risk of ASD. These findings parallel strong, consistent increases in cumulative vaccine exposure during early childhood and the reported prevalence of autism across successive birth cohorts. To date, no study has evaluated the safety of the entire cumulative pediatric vaccine schedule for neurodevelopmental outcomes through age 9 or 18 years. Nearly all existing research has focused on a narrow subset of individual vaccines or components—primarily MMR, thimerosal-containing, or aluminum-adjuvanted products—meaning that only a small fraction of total childhood vaccine exposure has ever been assessed for associations with ASD or other NDDs.

Conclusion: The totality of evidence supports a multifactorial model of ASD in which genetic predisposition, neuroimmune biology, environmental toxicants, perinatal stressors, and iatrogenic exposures converge to produce the phenotype of a post-encephalitic state. Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD, supported by convergent mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiologic findings, and characterized by intensified use, the clustering of multiple doses during critical neurodevelopmental windows, and the lack of research on the cumulative safety of the full pediatric schedule. As ASD prevalence continues to rise at an unprecedented pace, clarifying the risks associated with cumulative vaccine dosing and timing remains an urgent public health priority.

(See link for article)
__________________
For more:

ACTION: Retract Deplorable Lyme Disease CME

https://www.change.org/p/the-us-senate-calling-for-a-congressional-investigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/34006713?

Medscape Now! Interprofessional Care of Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome

Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH, United States
Oct 25, 2025

What was deceitfully established here in the US has been propagated worldwide as signatures for this petition are coming in from 21 countries!

Let’s put our numbers to work. Consider writing an email to Adrian Duncan of Medscape/WebMD referencing this Update and demand a retraction of this deplorable and misleading CME directed to the medical community. 

Change.org Petition Update (106,796 Signatures)
https://www.change.org/p/the-us-senate-calling-for-a-congressional-investigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/34006713

Medscape Now! Interprofessional Care of Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome

Adrian Duncan, Group Vice President
Global Head of Education & Medical Affairs

aduncan@webmd.net

———- Original Message ———-
From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: “aduncan@webmd.net” <aduncan@webmd.net>
Cc: “cme@medscape.net” <cme@medscape.net>, “caitlin@medlitera.com” <caitlin@medlitera.com>, “naseem@medlitera.com” <naseem@medlitera.com>, “michelle@medlitera.com” <michelle@medlitera.com>

Date: 10/24/2025 12:42 PM EDT
Subject: Medscape Now! Understanding the Latest Evidence and Best Practices for Interprofessional Care of Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome

Medscape Now! Understanding the Latest Evidence and Best Practices for Interprofessional Care of Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome
https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/medscape-now-understanding-latest-evidence-and-best-2025a1000rrr
CME Author: Naseem Bazargan, MPH     Developed with AI assistance.

Excerpt:

State of the Evidence

“To date, our understanding of the pathophysiology of Lyme IACI remains limited,[4] with little to no evidence supporting chronic Borrelia infection as the underlying cause.”

Adrian Duncan, Group Vice President
Global Head of Education & Medical Affairs

Dear Mr. Duncan,

In reference to the Medscape article written by Naseem Bazargan, I asked Google’s Gemini AI the following questions:

The latest Medscape CME education claiming to be developed with AI assistance, appears to have omitted the following references:

  • 2018 Middelveen study; “Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease” identifying twelve patients who were culture positive after antibiotic treatment. Some of these patients had taken as many as eleven different types of antibiotics. Also missing is the NIH funded Embers studies of persistent Bb infection in monkeys and mice. And the Sapi study: “The Long-Term Persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi Antigens and DNA in the Tissues of a Patient with Lyme Disease”  Here is the positive culture report from the CDC at Fort Collins Colorado and the chronic Lyme autopsy results from the patient in the Sapi study: Page 1234567. The destructive nature of Borrelia is evident in the patient’s liver (nutmeg liver), kidneys, heart, lungs and brain. The patient died after the insurer refused additional IV antibiotic therapy.
  • Additional reference from 1990: “Chronic neurologic manifestations of Lyme disease” Dr. Allen Steere
  • In fact, there appears to be 700 references identifying persistent infection. 

Question: So, is AI participating in the collusion to suppress evidence of antibiotic resistance or chronic Lyme disease? And what about the other 700 references identifying persistent infection?

Mr. Duncan…  I will spare you the lengthy discourse and get right to the point.

Questions to AI:

1. Does a chronic relapsing seronegative disease fit the vaccine model?

AI Response:

A chronic, relapsing, seronegative disease does not fit the traditional vaccine model, which is primarily designed to prevent initial infections. The characteristics you describe present significant scientific and commercial challenges for vaccine developers.

2. Since you agreed that a chronic, relapsing, seronegative disease does not fit the traditional vaccine model this in and of itself would be the motivation to conceal any and all evidence of persistent infection wouldn’t you agree? This so-called debate is not a debate at all and deserves a criminal investigation. Who would be a suitable candidate to approach for a legal case?

AI Response: Allegations of medical fraud are typically handled as civil matters, but they can become criminal if there is evidence of gross negligence, recklessness, or intent to deceive, especially for financial gain.

Mr. Duncan,

Thirty-four years ago Dr. Allen Steere identified chronic Lyme disease which should have set off a red flag prompting an immediate search for better antimicrobials but then did a 180° as he became principal investigator (PI) of the Phase 3 clinical trial for the first Lyme disease vaccine. So all the eggs were put into the vaccine basket while a campaign was orchestrated to discredit the sick and disabled patient population along with the courageous clinicians attempting to help these patients. Apparently, a chronic relapsing seronegative disease did not fit the business model of patent royalties, vaccine development and pharmaceutical profits. This set the stage for long-term treatment denial and unimaginable pain and suffering around the world. It has been ongoing for over three decades now and the latest CME from Medscape is propagating this travesty.

Lyme disease has been grossly mishandled by our public health officials for the sake of a vaccine. A false public health narrative was enforced and any clinician who did not follow that narrative risked losing their license to practice medicine as seen in the documentary: Under our Skin. (please watch the 5min trailer)

I want to make this crystal clear; suppressing evidence of antibiotic resistance is not collaboration, it is collusion. Will you turn a blind eye to the facts/evidence I have presented?

A response to this inquiry is requested.

Respectfully submitted,

Carl Tuttle
Independent Researcher
Hudson, NH USA

Additional references:

Evidence Of Persistence Of Lyme Disease In Humans
https://www.lymedisease.org/lyme-basics/resources/evidence-of-persistence-lyme-disease-in-humans/

Go here to sign Tuttle’s petition:  https://c.org/sffxsgXrdJ

________________

For more: