Archive for the ‘Lyme’ Category

Long-underfunded Lyme Disease Research Gets An Injection of Money – and Ideas

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/04/long-underfunded-lyme-disease-research-gets-injection-money-and-ideas

The black-legged tick can carry the bacterium that causes Lyme disease.  ISTOCK.COM/DIETERMEYRL

Long-underfunded Lyme disease research gets an injection of money—and ideas

By Jennifer Couzin-Frankel

Months after a U.S. Congress–mandated working group sounded the alarm about tickborne illnesses and urged more federal action and money, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is readying a strategic plan for these diseases. Last week it also, serendipitously, issued a rare solicitation for prevention proposals in tickborne diseases. The new pot of money, $6 million in 2020, represents a significant boost; NIH spent $23 million last year on Lyme disease, by far the most common tickborne illness, within $56 million devoted to tickborne diseases overall.

“I’m happy for anything” new going toward research, says John Aucott, director of the Johns Hopkins Lyme Disease Clinical Research Center in Baltimore, Maryland, who chaired the group that wrote the 2018 report. Strategies that may garner support include vaccines that target multiple pathogens carried by ticks or that kill the ticks themselves.

Aucott’s panel included academic and government scientists as well as patient advocates; it formed as a result of the 2016 21st Century Cures Act. The group’s report described tickborne diseases as a “serious and growing threat.” About 30,000 confirmed Lyme disease cases were reported last year to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), but the agency believes the real number to be more than 300,000. Cases of Lyme disease have roughly tripled since the 1990s as ticks carrying Borrelia burgdorferi, the causative bacterium, have spread in response to climate change, neighborhoods encroaching on animal habitats, and other ecologic shifts.

The Lyme disease field has for years been mired in controversy—researchers receive hate mail from angry and desperate patients, and scientific disputes can be vitriolic. That may have left government agencies reluctant to wade too deep into the fray.

“I think the discussion is starting to shift,” says Monica Embers, a microbiologist at Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana.

She and others still hope for additional money from NIH and CDC for diagnostics and treatment research. CDC’s budget for Lyme disease grew this year from $10.7 million to $12 million—the first increase in 5 years, albeit a modest one.

“Preventing infection is going to go a long way if we can do it,” Embers says.

Symptoms of Lyme disease vary but can include a rash at the site of the tick bite, fever, fatigue, and swollen lymph nodes. After a course of antibiotics, 10% to 20% of those infected remain sick, and the question is why: Some scientists believe the bacterium can persist in the body, but others dismiss the idea. This dispute, combined with patients whom doctors often can’t help, has created a fractious field unlike almost any other.

The $6 million from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), is slated to fund up to 15 projects. The funding “will get new technology out of the shadows,” spurring development of nascent approaches and collaborations, says Maria Gomes-Solecki, a veterinarian at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center in Memphis who has designed an oral vaccine for mice and other rodents against B. burgdorferi. It kills the bacterium in ticks feeding on the animals. A company called US Biologic, also in Memphis, is seeking marketing approval for the vaccine from the Department of Agriculture and hopes to sell it to homeowners and health departments.

“Vaccines are certainly going to be at the top” of prevention priorities for tickborne diseases, says Samuel Perdue, chief of the Basic Sciences Section in NIAID’s Bacteriology and Mycology Branch in Bethesda, Maryland, noting that the institute already funds some vaccine research.

The only Lyme vaccine for people had a difficult history: It was almost 80% effective but was pulled from the market in 2002 after safety concerns surfaced and sales tanked. Since then, tickborne diseases have become a growing problem, and the black-legged tick can transmit many of them, says Richard Ostfeld, a disease ecologist at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York. He favors developing a vaccine that protects against multiple pathogens, possibly by targeting ticks instead. Some scientists are studying how to design a tick-killing vaccine for people that reacts to the tick’s salivary proteins. Ostfeld knows firsthand that this is possible: After exposure to dozens of tick bites during fieldwork, his immune system now kills ticks when they begin to feed on him.

“I’m not alone,” he says. “There are people who seem to attack the tick.” Animal models have backed the approach.

Nonvaccine prevention efforts are underway as well. Across 24 neighborhoods in Dutchess County in New York, Ostfeld and ecologist Felicia Keesing of Bard College in Annandale-on-Hudson, New York, are leading an effort to test whether a tick-killing fungus and a pesticide that kills ticks when applied to animals can reduce infection rates in people and pets. Much of that project is supported by the Steven & Alexandra Cohen Foundation, which has spent more than $42 million on Lyme and other tickborne disease research since 2015. Two other groups, the Global Lyme Alliance and the Bay Area Lyme Foundation, have together directed more than $20 million to research in recent years.

“These foundations are giving a lot of money,” says Embers, who receives foundation support. “They want translational research, and they want answers.”

Foundations are keen to address the third rail of Lyme disease: how Borrelia bacteria persist—if they do—in treated patients who don’t get better. NIH’s strategic plan is due this summer, but Ostfeld says researchers coming together could make it easier for the agency to boost funding in a polarized field. “The responsibility,” he suggests, “lies at least in part with the community to try to avoid so much acrimony and to try to find areas of agreement.”

________________

**Comment**

Recently, Global Lyme Alliance’s (GLA) chief scientific officer gave a response to the NIH’s request for the plan mentioned in this article.  He makes great points that demand consideration. After that article within the following link, advocate Carl Tuttle delineates 10 ways on how to maintain the illusion that the Lyme/MSIDS pandemic is under control:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/04/20/gla-chief-scientific-officers-response-to-nih-on-tick-borne-disease-strategic-plan/

 If you read Tuttle’s list, you can begin to see why some researchers are receiving, “hate mail from angry and desperate patients, and scientific disputes can be vitriolic.”
Patients have been told for over 40 years that all of this is “in their heads,” and people have died essentially due to neglect by the medical field.  Researchers are partly to blame as they have refused to consider worldwide research, base their studies on assumptions rather than science, and have often crawled into bed with Big Pharma by owning patents on pathogens, test kits, vaccines, and other metabolomics: ConflictReport
As to the author’s statement that this polarization, “may have left government agencies reluctant to wade too deep into the fray,” all I can say is,
“Man up!”
This isn’t a popularity contest and public servants are supposed to work for public interest, not benefit from extremely ill people.
Do what you were hired to do!

Category:

Activism, Lyme

GLA Chief Scientific Officer’s Response to NIH on Tick-borne Disease Strategic Plan

https://globallymealliance.org/request-information-input-nih-tick-borne-diseases-strategic-plan/?

tick-borne diseases

BELOW IS A LETTER FROM GLOBAL LYME ALLIANCE’S CHIEF SCIENTIFIC OFFICER IN RESPONSE TO THE NIH’S REQUEST FOR INFORMATION TO THEIR TICK-BORNE DISEASES STRATEGIC PLAN

As Chief Scientific Officer of GLA, I herewith respond to the solicitation for feedback to the National Institutes of Health Tick-borne Diseases Strategic Plan, which was developed by the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group, a Health & Human Services advisory committee established by Congress in its 21st Century Cures Act. While the plan includes important topics on which research efforts should focus, our position is that it neglects several urgent areas that are of equal or higher importance.

Deficiencies in the current Strategic Plan include:

  1. The lack of any mention under the heading “Basic Research” of the need to better understand mechanisms of bacterial persistence both in reservoir species and in the face of exposure to antibiotics and the implications for treatment failure and persistent infection/symptomatology.
  2. The lack of mention under the heading “Diagnosis and Detection” of the need to supplement indirect diagnostic tests, that rely upon the presence of antibodies, with direct tests that detect the presence of pathogen-specific protein antigens or nucleic acid. Additionally, the testing paradigm needs to shift towards multi-pathogen (bacterial, viral, etc.) rather than solely Lyme disease diagnoses.
  3. The lack of mention under the heading “Therapeutics” of the need to develop novel treatment strategies for those suffering from multiple tick-borne and/or opportunistic infections. Additionally, there is a need to explore non-traditional treatment modalities to care for patients continuing to suffer from persistent infection/symptomatology due to initial antibiotic treatment failure.

The list also underemphasizes (1) the ecology and management of ticks; (2) ecological interactions between ticks, hosts, and pathogens; and (3) environmental drivers of tick emergence, spread, and changing risk. Specifically, the plan lacks:

  1. Mention of national surveillance of ticks and tick-borne pathogens that would provide real-world representations of exposure risk in space and time;
  2. Any mention of finding vulnerabilities in the tick/host/pathogen life cycle and of the importance of seeking the means of exploiting such vulnerabilities to control exposure;
  3. A focus on identifying and ameliorating anthropogenic disturbances (land use changes, climate change, habitat degradation, etc.) that exacerbate tick-borne risk;
  4. Recognition of the importance of understanding how both native and non-native ticks (e.g., black-legged ticks, lone star ticks, long-horned ticks, etc.) become invasive, rapidly expand beyond their historic geographic ranges, and potentially share hosts and pathogens; and
  5. A focus on novel and existing methods to reduce tick populations.

It is our institutional view that any set of research priorities on tick-borne diseases in the United States must address these essential issues. We hope that by pointing out these omissions you will be allowed to redress their absence in a final draft of the NIH’s Tick-borne Diseases Strategic Plan.

Respectfully,

Timothy J Sellati

 

Timothy J. Sellati, Ph.D.
Chief Scientific Officer
Global Lyme Alliance

_______________________

**Comment**

It saddens me that still after over 40 years, the basics need to be pointed out to the people running the show.  The issues delineated in this letter are so basic a kindergartner could explain them, yet authorities treat this as a one pathogen illness using testing that’s like throwing sand into the ocean.

My only concern with #3 in the last series is the mention of “climate change” when independent Canadian tick researcher, John Scott, has completely blown that “theory” out of the water showing ticks to be very ecoadaptive and able to survive harsh conditions by merely crawling under leaf litter or snow:   https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/08/13/study-shows-lyme-not-propelled-by-climate-change/

Nothing has resulted from ANY data on the climate in helping very ill patients.

Recently advocate Carl Tuttle delineated 10 ways on how to maintain the illusion that the Lyme/MSIDS pandemic is under control:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/04/19/how-to-maintain-the-illusion-the-lyme-misds-pandemic-is-under-control/

See link for references and entire article.  List below developed article:

1. Produce a two tier antibody testing algorithm where first line screening tests (Elisa) fail to detect 60% of infections. Those patients who do test positive will be allowed the second more sensitive test (Western blot) but design the test with strict criteria (Case definition) so as to rule out 90% keeping infection numbers artificially low.

2. Fund only those studies through institutions with researchers that have a bias against persistent infection.

3. Maintain a belief that all stages of infection, acute through late stage are easily cured with a standard two week treatment guideline and turn the disease into a syndrome when patients complain of persistent debilitating symptoms after unsuccessful treatment.

4. If a culture test should be developed which is the gold standard for many bacterial infections do not recognize this test and insist it is not government approved.

5. Create a map depicting limited territories were the infection is present.Use an existing institution with a bias against persistent infection to manage the data.

6. Define the disease exclusively as a zoonotic illness and disregard congenital and gestational transfer cases or transfer between sexually active couples.

7. No need to screen the blood supply for this pathogen.

8. Ignore Primate studies proving persistent infection.

9. Create a foundation to promote the disinformation campaign and staff the foundation with the same researchers with a bias against persistent infection.

10. Create a Working Group to talk about the problem for another decade (submitting reports every two years) without upgrading the threat to Highest Alert even though infection rates may exceed five times the AIDS epidemic or become twice as prevalent as breast cancer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Category:

Activism, Lyme, Uncategorized

How to Maintain the Illusion the Lyme/MISDS Pandemic is Under Control

https://www.change.org/p/the-us-senate-calling-for-a-congressional-investigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/24443341?cs_tk=AroD2-

New! “Tutorial update for 2019”

APR 18, 2019 — 

Please see the latest email to the TBDWG

Lyme Bumper Stickers (Public Service Announcement)
https://www.ebay.com/itm/123659578861

WAKE UP AMERICA!

——— Original Message ———-

From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: brett.giroir@hhs.gov, tickbornedisease@hhs.gov
Cc: (98 Undisclosed recipients)
Date: April 18, 2019 at 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: New! “Tutorial update for 2019”
To the Tick Borne Disease Working Group;

The following nine step tutorial originally sent to Secretary Kathleen G. Sebelius in 2012 is in need of an update.
There are now ten steps designed to maintain the belief that health authorities have everything under control. Note: Additional steps may be necessary to maintain this illusion.

Carl Tuttle
Lyme Endemic Hudson, NH

___________________________________________
Feb 11, 2012

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
Attn: Secretary Kathleen G. Sebelius

Dear Secretary Sebelius,

Please take a moment to read the following document presented to the New Hampshire Department of Health.

Nine Steps to Deny an Epidemic on a National Level 101

The following fictional tutorial was created to assist those in position of authority acting as an autonomous group where its authority is absolute, cannot be challenged and answer only to themselves.

This easily reproduced nine step program is designed to maintain the belief that health authorities have everything under control. This program can be used for any infectious disease when denial is necessary.

1. Produce a two tier antibody testing algorithm where first line screening tests (Elisa) fail to detect 60% of infections. Those patients who do test positive will be allowed the second more sensitive test (Western blot) but design the test with strict criteria (Case definition) so as to rule out 90% keeping infection numbers artificially low.

Strict criteria:https://www.dropbox.com/s/ppus0unm0j2oiff/Western Blot.pdf?dl=0

Note: Do not consider a false negative Elisa as they do not exist and remember; Western blot tests are only ordered after a positive Elisa. Disregard any (outside) studies proving poor testing reliability and certainly do not listen to any patient complaints.

Poor testing reliability:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1248466/

Patient complaints:https://www.dropbox.com/s/d6kwab49zeqyp2p/PatientComplaints.docx?dl=0

2. Fund only those studies through institutions with researchers that have a bias against persistent infection. It is imperative that these researchers are retained exclusively to continue the pier review process and publishing of each other’s studies. There must be no acceptance of outside studies.

Publishing: http://lyme.kaiserpapers.org/idsa-affiliations-with-editorial-boards.html

3. Maintain a belief that all stages of infection, acute through late stage are easily cured with a standard two week treatment guideline and turn the disease into a syndrome when patients complain of persistent debilitating symptoms after unsuccessful treatment. Insist that persistent infection cannot exist even though antibody tests can only identify at best a past infection.

Treatment guideline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21220656

Persistent debilitating symptoms: http://www.change.org/petitions/subjective-symptoms-after-treatment-of-lyme-disease

Unsuccessful treatment: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22294245

4. If a culture test should be developed which is the gold standard for many bacterial infections do not recognize this test and insist it is not government approved.

Culture test: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0kgw84wyezzjb2a/Aug1 Advance Lab Press Release.pdf?dl=0

Not government approved: https://www.cdc.gov/lyme/diagnosistesting/LabTest/OtherLab/index.html

5. Create a map depicting limited territories were the infection is present. Use an existing institution with a bias against persistent infection to manage the data. Employ the services of a well known public relations firm to announce the map so as to maintain the belief that mainstream healthcare has “got everything under control.”

Existing institution: http://news.yale.edu/2004/06/23/29-million-cdc-grant-yale-study-lyme-disease-transmission-humans

Announce the map:http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-02/bc-nmp012712.php

6. Define the disease exclusively as a zoonotic illness and disregard congenital and gestational transfer cases or transfer between sexually active couples.

Sexually active couples: https://www.dropbox.com/s/r1wpuozw2czhvyi/LymeDiseasepandemic.pdf?dl=0

7. No need to screen the blood supply for this pathogen.

8. Primate studies proving persistent infection after standard treatment will be ignored.

Primate studies:http://www.prohealth.com/library/showarticle.cfm?libid=16759

9. Create a foundation to promote the disinformation campaign and staff the foundation with the same researchers with a bias against persistent infection.

Foundation: https://www.aldf.com/about-us/

NEW STEP:

10. Create a Working Group to talk about the problem for another decade (submitting reports every two years) without upgrading the threat to Highest Alert even though infection rates may exceed five times the AIDS epidemic or become twice as prevalent as breast cancer. Use a public health official i.e. Assistant Secretary of Health to applaud the Working Group while avoiding any and all inquiries that might identify the mishandling of the epidemic no matter how many scientific references are presented.

Working Group: https://www.hhs.gov/ash/advisory-committees/tickbornedisease/index.html

The nine (now ten) steps provided should prove useful when the need arises to obscure the truth attributable to any mistakes that may have created the outbreak while eliminating any ownership of the problem.

Caution: There is a real risk however that those who follow the program will be indicted for fraud against humanity. [Racketeering lawsuit] New!

Fraud against humanity:https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/lymecryme

Racketeering lawsuit: https://www.dropbox.com/s/18uyrli878ug51m/LymeDisease RICO Lawsuit.pdf?dl=0

Again, this is a fictional tutorial as nothing like this could take place in the United States.

United States: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxWgS0XLVqw&feature=channel_page
Sincerely,

Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH

____________________________________________________________________________________________

And, Tuttle drops the mic….  KABOOM!    

                                                                               iu

Category:

Activism, Lyme

First Study Showing Borrelia & Chlamydia Mixed Biofilms in Infected Human Skin Tissues

Borrelia_and_Chlamydia_can_form_mixed_biofilms_in_

Borrelia and Chlamydia Can Form Mixed Biofilms in Infected Human Skin Tissues

E. Sapi1*,K. Gupta1, K. Wawrzeniak1, G. Gaur1, J. Torres1, K. Filush1, A. Melillo1 and B. Zelger21
Received: 15 January 2019; accepted: 04 March 2019
Abstract
Our research group has recently shown that Borrelia burgdorferi, the Lyme disease bacterium, is capable of forming biofilms in Borrelia-infected human skin lesions called Borrelia lymphocytoma (BL). Biofilm structures often contain multiple organisms in a symbiotic relationship, with the goal of providing shelter from environmental stressors such as antimicrobial agents. Because multiple co-infections are common in Lyme disease, the main questions of this study were whether BL tissues contained other pathogenic species and/or whether there is any co-existence with Borrelia biofilms.
Recent reports suggested Chlamydia-like organisms in ticks and Borrelia-infectedhuman skin tissues; therefore, Chlamydia-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analyses were performed in Borrelia-positive BL tissues. Analyses of the sequence of the positive PCR bands revealed that Chlamydia spp. DNAs are indeed present in these tissues, and their sequences have the best identity match to Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Chlamydia trachomatis. Fluorescent immunohistochemical and in situ hybridization methods demonstrated the presence of Chlamydia antigen and DNA in 84% of Borrelia biofilms. Confocal microscopy revealed that Chlamydia locates in the center of Borrelia biofilms, and together, they form a well-organized mixed patho-
genic structure.
In summary, our study is the first to show Borrelia–Chlamydia mixed biofilms in infected human skin tissues, which raises the questions of whether these human pathogens have developed a symbiotic relationship for their mutual survival.

____________________

**Comment**

This study is important as once again, they show biofilm formation and the involvement of other pathogens. Mainstream medicine better wake up soon. The potential symbiotic relationship between these organisms shouldn’t be underestimated and they certainly should be factored into the problem with testing that only tests for one organism and treatments that only treat for one thing. Mainstream med isn’t even hitting the broad side of the barn on this one.

Chlamydia-like organisms are in ticks:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2016/10/07/chlamydia-like-organisms-found-in-ticks/

Here, researchers identify chlamydia along with other pathogens in Alzheimer’s:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/03/09/researchers-identify-herpes-1-chlamydia-pneumoniae-several-types-of-spirochaete-as-major-causes-of-alzheimers/

Chlamydia is best defined from the latin word: cloak. Yep. Another stealth pathogen.

Great read on the types of chlamydia:  https://articles.mercola.com/chlamydia/types.aspx The first two are mentioned in the abstract:

  • Chlamydia trachomatis can be passed from one person to another via unprotected sexual intercourse. Pain English: this is a STD.
  • Chlamydia pneumoniae (C. pneumoniae), a nonsexually transmitted disease that infects the lungs and causes bacterial pneumonia.
  • Chlamydia psittaci is another chlamydia strain that can lead to a rare condition called psittacosis, aka “parrot fever.”

 

 

Category:

Lyme, research, Testing, Ticks

Global Lyme Alliance Doing Kick-butt Research

https://globallymealliance.org/press-releases/global-lyme-alliance-reveals-several-drugs-drug-combinations-show-success-treating-lyme-disease/?

GLA’S PIONEERING RESEARCH FUNDING STRATEGY RESULTS IN PROMISING OUTCOMES THAT HELP PATIENTS SUFFERING FROM LONG-TERM LYME DISEASE

STAMFORD, CONN (April 12, 2019)—Global Lyme Alliance’s commitment to identify and fund innovative and promising Lyme disease research is unrivaled. A vital component to GLA’s leadership role in Lyme disease research is its success with early-stage funding. Discovering and supporting researchers who are new to Lyme but bring years of relevant disease work or are at the beginning of their careers, helps distinguish GLA’s approach to finding the evidence-based answers that will ultimately help patients.

In 2009, on a limited research budget, GLA had decided to proactively recruit scientists and fund research in new areas to further the understanding of Borrelia burgdorferi (the Lyme bacteria) that could lead to an improved diagnostic test and ultimately, a cure, for Lyme disease. GLA’s objectives were to:

  1. determine if the antibiotic evading technique of bacteria, like Escherichia coli, is being used by the Lyme bacteria and therefore explain the typical patient experience of symptom improvement followed by symptom relapse
  2. determine if such persistent or dormant cells were protected within biofilms
  3. identify existing drugs from a vast FDA library and find novel new treatments to eliminate persister (non-growing) and growing Lyme bacteria which could be a cure
  4. identify the surface proteins of the persister form of the bacteria to improve the current diagnostic tests. The first step in achieving these objectives was to fund a study conducted by Ying Zhang, M.D. at Johns Hopkins University in early 2010, to see if the Lyme bacteria could form persister or dormant cells in the test tube; and if they did, to proceed with the other aforementioned aims

Based on early findings of the Zhang/Johns Hopkins study that showed that the Lyme bacteria could ‘morph’ into persisters, GLA then recruited Kim Lewis, Ph.D., Director of the Antimicrobial Discovery Center at Northeastern University, who is an expert in the area of bacterial persistence and antibiotic tolerance. GLA worked with Dr. Lewis on developing a multi-year study design and agreed to fund it. This study would ultimately confirm the ability of Lyme organisms to become persisters and went on to then find existing and new drugs to kill these persister (non-growing) forms. Both Northeastern and Johns Hopkins were running parallel, independent experiments and drug discovery protocols backed by GLA.

By 2018, Dr. Ying Zhang and his team at Johns Hopkins made significant strides:

  • Confirmed the existence in vitro of the dormant, persister Lyme bacteria
  • Showed how the Lyme bacteria goes dormant and changes its protein composition and shape when exposed to antibiotics and then grows again when antibiotic treatment is stopped
  • Identified its protein components and a new diagnostic tool to recognize persistence in patients
  • Used high-throughput drug discovery and drug efficacy testing programs
  • Identified a powerful combination of Daptomycin + Cefuroxime + Doxycycline to eliminate growing and non-growing forms of the bacteria and identified essential oils from spice and culinary herbs (g., oregano, cinnamon bark, and clove bud) which also serve to eliminate persister bacteria as well as biofilm-like forms

By 2018: Dr. Kim Lewis and his team at Northeastern University, independently, also made considerable findings:

  • Confirmed the existence in vitro of the dormant, persister Lyme bacteria
  • Showed how the Lyme bacteria goes dormant when exposed to antibiotics and then springs back to a form capable of growing again
  • Using a separate drug screening tool, identified Daptomycin, Mitomycin C (an anticancer agent) and Ceftriaxone as a possible drug combination to eliminate dormant and growing cells
  • Discovered through Dr. Lewis’ pipeline discovery program that Disulfiram, used for treating alcoholism, was extremely effective in culture and in mice in to killing burgdorferi in all forms
  • Discovered an antibiotic through his proprietary approach to screen soil bacteria, known as Hygromycin A that could kill the Lyme bacteria in vitro and in mice
  • Proved that in vitro, Vancomycin was more powerful in clearing all forms of the Lyme bacteria than Doxycycline

The complete path from initial seed funding to results that will impact patients follows.

GLA Initial Seed Funding (2013)

  • GLA is the first to identify Dr. Lewis as a scientific expert looking at bacterial persister cells, antibiotic tolerance, and novel therapies who could apply his knowledge to the study of Lyme disease
  • GLA helps design and funds Dr. Lewis’ multi-year study, “Persister Cells and Antibiotic Tolerance in Bb” to investigate whether burgdorferi forms antibiotic-tolerant persister forms

GLA Annual Lyme Disease Research Symposium (2014)

  • In 2014, through regular progress reports to GLA Scientific Advisory Board and presenting at GLA’s annual Lyme Disease Research Symposium, Dr. Lewis shares his initial findings from GLA-funded study. At the Symposium are other top scientists, including Dr. Brian Fallon, Dr. Armin Alaedini, and Dr. John Aucott
  • Lewis finds that B. burgdorferi can go dormant to evade antibiotics and then restart replication once antibiotics are removed. He had then performed an initial screen of FDA drugs for novel compounds that could target persister forms of the Lyme bacteria
  • Lewis was honored at Global Lyme Alliance Greenwich Gala, along with Ying Zhang, M.D., Ph.D., of Johns Hopkins University for their work in discovering Borrelia persisters

Published Findings (2015): The Lyme bacteria morphs to evade antibiotics

  • Lewis publishes landmark paper on persisters in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, “Borrelia burgdorferi, the Causative Agent of Lyme Disease, Forms Drug-Tolerant Persister Cells”, based on GLA funding from 2013. He showed that antibiotics killed most lab-grown B. burgdorferi, with a small surviving population that tolerated drug treatment. His team found that Mitomycin C efficiently killed persisters
  • Lewis noted that persisters play dead and then reawaken once treatment is completed in the context of recurrent urinary tract infections. “They start multiplying again, he explains, “and you get this relapsing, chronic infection.” It is possible a similar situation and explanation exists for chronic Lyme disease; however, more research is needed to test this hypothesis

GLA Fosters Collaboration & Continues Funding (2016, 2017, 2018)

  • In 2016, GLA funds Dr. Lewis’ well-regarded study “Discovery of new antibiotics and combinations”
  • Initial findings include results using Disulfiram (an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of chronic alcoholism and Hygromycin A (an antibiotic derived from soil bacteria)
  • In 2017 and 2018, a top Lyme-treating physician starts implementing Dr. Lewis’ findings using Disulfiram to treat post-treatment Lyme disease patients. To date, on a limited number of patients, Disulfiram is proving very promising
  • GLA-funded researcher and Lyme-treating physician Dr. Brian Fallon of Columbia University designs a clinical study to determine therapeutic efficacy of Disulfiram in 2019
  • Thanks to four years of financial backing by GLA, Dr. Lewis is able to deliver ground-breaking discoveries in Lyme disease, in particular, persisters and novel treatments, enabling him to attract attention from additional private foundation donors. This enables Dr. Lewis greater opportunity to investigate new therapies for chronic Lyme patients

Published Findings (2018): Vancomycin is the strongest antibiotic in treating Lyme disease

  • In 2018, Dr. Lewis publishes important paper on novel therapies in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, “Identifying Vancomycin as an Effective Antibiotic for KillingBorrelia burgdorferi“, based on GLA funding.
  • Lewis’ team found that Vancomycin was effective against in vitro cultures of growing B. burgdorferi. However, this class of drugs is not expected to work on stationary persister cells, in which growth is very slow, and cell wall synthesis is expected to be minimal. Unexpectedly, when tested on stationary B. burgdorferi, they found that cell wall synthesis still occurred, and could be blocked by Vancomycin.
  • To extend their studies to an in vivo model, the group treated burgdorferi-infected, immunodeficient mice for five days. They found that Vancomycin and Ceftriaxone each completely blocked bacterial growth, compared with partial eradication by Doxycycline. These studies suggest that more effective antimicrobial drugs, used early in infection, may prevent or reduce the occurrence of persisting infection.

Clinical Trials & Helping Patients (2019)

  • In 2019, GLA helps facilitate clinical trials leveraging Dr. Lewis’ findings with respected Lyme-treating physicians. Clinical trials performed under the guidance of GLA’s rigorous peer-reviewed process will ensure valid results, to most effectively impact patients.

Lyme disease is extremely complex, and the challenge to understand it and ascertain how to most successfully treat patients impacted by it is a herculean task. Through an aggressive and innovative research strategy, backed by a world-renowned Scientific Advisory Board and top-notch in-house science team, GLA is finding the answers.

About Global Lyme Alliance
Global Lyme Alliance is the leading 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to conquering Lyme and other tick-borne diseases through research, education and awareness. GLA has gained national prominence for funding some of the most urgent and promising research in the field, while expanding education and awareness programs for the general public and physicians. We support those around the globe in need of information about tick-borne diseases. Learn more at GLA.org.

____________________

**Comment**

Credit should be given where credit is due.  GLA is kicking butt in the world of Lyme/MSIDS research.

Currently, Disulfiram is being used on numerous Lyme/MSIDS patients in Mexico and many more in the U.S. with pretty astounding results. The herxes can be surreal so it takes an experienced practitioner, but, it has action against  malaria, HIV, cancer and Lyme (borrelia):

Malaria:

HIV:

Cancer:

Lyme (borrelia):

Do not self-treat. Talk to your practitioner about these findings and work with him/her.  While Disulfiram (Antabuse) is cheap, it can cause vast die-off and an inflammatory response that could put you in the ER.

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research, Treatment