Archive for the ‘Lyme’ Category

Borrelia Miyamotoi DNA in Patient Suspected of Lyme Borreliosis

https://www.aaem.pl/-Borrelia-miyamotoi-DNA-in-a-patient-suspected-of-Lyme-borreliosis

Borrelia miyamotoi DNA in a patient suspected of Lyme borreliosis
Beata Fiecek 1, Tomasz Szewczyk 2, Grażyna Lewandowska 1, Tomasz Chmielewski 1
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2025;32(1):142-145

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26444/aaem/191046

Article (PDF, 771.39 kB)

ABSTRACT
Introduction and Objective.
Manifestations of infection caused by Borrelia miyamotoi can mimic highly variable symptoms of Lyme borreliosis. The aim of the study was to detect DNA from B. miyamotoi samples from patients with suspected neuroborreliosis.
Materials and Method. Samples of blood serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were collected from 133 patients. Diagnosis was established by the detection of specific antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.) with ELISA and immunoblot. All Borrelia-positive samples were tested by nested PCR for the B. miyamotoi and B. burgdorferi s.l. DNA.
Results. B. miyamotoi DNA was detected in the CSF of one (0.8%) patient. DNA of B. burgdorferi s.l. was not found in any samples.
Conclusions. Detection of the B. miyamotoi in patients with central nervous system infections expand the development of knowledge on infections caused by Borrelia spirochetes.
_______________
**Comment**
Just like STARI, B. miyamotoi looks, smells, and feels just like Lyme but will never be picked up on standard CDC 2-tiered testing for Lyme.
While there are both PCR and antibody tests for Borrelia miyamotoi, they are offered at specialty labs which many mainstream doctors just assume are pure evil because that’s what the CDC has beat into their heads for decades.
For more:

“In vitro analysis has shown the susceptibility of B. miyamotoi to ceftriaxone, azithromycin, and doxycycline, with resistance to amoxicillin,” the authors explain.

Since Borrelia miyamotoi is not a reportable illness to the CDC, no one has any clue about prevalence but reports are coming in continually that it’s highly likely to be a much bigger problem than ‘authorities’ believe.

It was recently discovered that:

Category:

Borrelia Miyamotoi (Relapsing Fever Group), Lyme, research, Testing, Ticks

SOT For Lyme: Experimental, Expensive, but Full of Potential

https://www.lymedisease.org/sot-lyme-treatment/

SOT therapy for Lyme is experimental, expensive—and full of potential.

Oct. 3, 2025

Part One of a two-part series.

By Maria Marian, ND, MSE

For many people facing chronic infections such as Lyme disease, Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), herpes simplex virus (HSV-1 and HSV-2), or cytomegalovirus (CMV), the journey can be long and frustrating.

Antibiotics, antivirals, herbal therapies, and IV treatments may help initially, yet symptoms often persist or recur. This has led both patients and clinicians to explore innovative therapies that move beyond conventional antimicrobial approaches.

One such emerging option is Supportive Oligonucleotide Therapy (SOT), also referred to as antisense oligonucleotide therapy. Although still considered experimental in the context of Lyme and chronic viral infections, SOT builds upon decades of genetic medicine research and has even reached FDA approval in select infectious and cancer-related applications.

What is SOT?

At its core, SOT is a gene-silencing technique. Scientists design a short synthetic strand of nucleic acid (called an oligonucleotide) that binds to a very specific piece of genetic code inside the pathogen—such as Borrelia burgdorferi (the bacterium that causes Lyme disease) or EBV.

When this oligonucleotide binds, it blocks the pathogen’s ability to produce a protein essential for replication or metabolism. In simple terms, it’s like removing a crucial page from the pathogen’s instruction manual. Without that instruction, the organism can’t replicate efficiently, and its numbers gradually decline.

This strategy falls under the larger field of “antisense therapy.” The term comes from the fact that these therapeutic molecules bind to the “sense” strand of RNA or DNA, neutralizing its ability to produce proteins.

Reference: Crooke ST. Antisense Drug Technology: Principles, Strategies, and Applications. CRC Press; 2008.

How the therapy works

The process of SOT treatment involves several carefully orchestrated steps:

  1. Blood Draw & Testing – A blood sample is taken and analyzed using molecular techniques such as PCR to identify which pathogens are active.
  2. Custom Design – A laboratory designs a patient-specific oligonucleotide tailored to silence a genetic target in that pathogen. Newer approaches like QRE-strain technology (Quasispecies Resistant Engineered strain) aim to account for genetic variations in pathogens, ensuring the oligonucleotide is effective across slightly different strains.
  3. Infusion – Once prepared, the oligonucleotide solution is returned to the clinic and administered as a single intravenous infusion.
  4. Ongoing Action – Unlike antibiotics or antivirals that are metabolized quickly, SOT molecules remain active for months (often up to six months), continuously working “day and night” to suppress pathogen replication.

The Science Behind It

Antisense oligonucleotides are not a new idea. In fact, the first FDA-approved antisense therapy, fomivirsen (Vitravene), was approved in 1998 to treat CMV retinitis in immunocompromised patients【PMID: 9815174】. Since then, several antisense and RNA-based drugs have reached the market for conditions ranging from high cholesterol (mipomersen) to spinal muscular atrophy (nusinersen)【PMID: 29191460】.

In infectious disease specifically:

  • CMV: Fomivirsen demonstrated that gene-silencing therapy can effectively reduce viral activity in humans.
  • Herpesviruses: Preclinical studies have shown that antisense molecules can block HSV and EBV replication in vitro【PMID: 19920191】.
  • Lyme disease: Pilot clinical data suggest that one or two SOT infusions can lead to statistically significant reductions in Borrelia burgdorferi DNA levels detected by PCR. For viral infections, two or three treatments may be needed to achieve measurable decreases.

While more research is essential, these early findings provide a rationale for SOT as a potential adjunctive therapy in chronic infections where other approaches fall short.

Why patients are interested

For individuals struggling with persistent infections, SOT offers several appealing features:

  • Precision targeting: Instead of broadly killing microbes (as antibiotics do), SOT goes after one critical genetic sequence, leaving other microbes untouched.
  • Durability: A single infusion provides months of activity, reducing the need for daily medication.
  • Immune-independent mechanism: Because SOT directly silences genes, it doesn’t rely on the immune system’s strength—a key advantage for patients with immune dysfunction.
  • Potential synergy: Many clinicians use SOT alongside integrative therapies (nutrition, detoxification, antimicrobials) for a more comprehensive approach.

Current limitations

Despite the excitement, it’s important to emphasize what SOT is not at this stage:

  • It is not FDA-approved for Lyme disease, EBV, or HSV. Its only infectious disease approval was for CMV retinitis, and that drug is no longer commercially available.
  • Clinical research in Lyme and chronic viral infections is preliminary, mostly limited to small pilot studies and case reports.
  • Costs can be significant, and insurance rarely covers it.
  • The decline in pathogen burden is gradual, and multiple treatments may be required.

In short: SOT is promising, but it remains an emerging therapy.

Looking ahead with both hope and caution

The field of RNA medicine is growing rapidly, with antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNAs (siRNAs), and messenger RNA (mRNA) therapies transforming the landscape of medicine. With continued research, we may see gene-silencing strategies like SOT become mainstream tools in the fight against chronic infections.

For now, patients and clinicians should approach SOT with both hope and caution—hope that it represents a real step forward in treating persistent pathogens, and caution because large, peer-reviewed trials are still needed to fully establish safety, efficacy, and long-term outcomes.

Part two will be published next week.

Maria Marian, ND, MSE, is a naturopathic physician at Jyzen Wellness in Mill Valley, California. In addition to her Doctorate of Naturopathic Medicine, she holds both a Bachelor and Master of Science in Chemical Engineering. She specializes in complex chronic illness, Lyme disease, and integrative approaches to immune dysfunction. Follow her on Instagram: @dr.marian.nd

For more:

According to both Dr. Ross and Dr. Cameron, it’s still too early to confidently recommend SOT for Lyme/MSIDS.

Category:

Lyme, Treatment, Viruses

As My Daughter Got Sicker and Sicker, Our Quest For Answers Dragged On. How Did We All Miss Lyme Disease?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/28/as-my-daughter-got-sicker-and-sicker-our-quest-for-answers-dragged-on-how-did-we-all-miss-the-bacteria-taking-over-her-body

As my daughter got sicker and sicker, our quest for answers dragged on. How did we all miss the bacteria taking over her body?

I write about nature, but when Milly got sick with a mystery illness, it never occurred to me that a long-forgotten tick bite could be the cause

There are many reasons to feel guilty. I’m a nature writer who preaches about the importance of wild childhoods, and my daughter has been made chronically ill by one trip to the countryside. I’m a journalist whose job it is to interrogate information and yet I didn’t demand better answers for her from NHS doctors. But the guilt is most painful when I remember a freezing wet day in October 2021.

Milly’s U10s football club were playing the league’s top team. Milly, player of the year the previous season, a whirl of blond energy across the pitch, had lost her enthusiasm for the beautiful game. That morning, she really didn’t want to play: she was tearful and exhausted. There was nothing obviously wrong: no cough, sickness, temperature. Her twin, Esme, was playing but without Milly the team were a player short. I told Milly they needed her. Stoic, she staggered off but couldn’t step on to the pitch. Instead, she curled into a ball of misery and fatigue beside her coach. The rain fell. Her team lost 15-1.

I cringe when I flick through the notebook where I recorded my daughters’ football matches (I was tragically keen). Below most results from the 21/22 season, I’ve written “Milly ill” or, worse, “Milly played ¼” or “Milly played ½”. All the time, cajoled or compelled to lead her “normal” life, Milly was getting sicker and sicker. We had no idea what was wrong. Every morning she looked terrible, dark circles beneath her eyes. She complained of perpetual tiredness, talked of being “disconcentrated” – she later learned to call this “brain fog” – and mentioned strange stabbing pains, mostly in her feet when she walked. Soon, she was too ill to go to school. Lockdown was over but it had become a permanent state for Milly, my wife, Lisa, and me.

What we didn’t know then, and wouldn’t discover until this spring, was that Milly’s body was being invaded by an insidious bacterium, Borrelia burgdorferi, which hides in connective tissue, confounding immune systems, wreaking havoc. Milly had Lyme disease, which takes its name from Old Lyme, a coastal town in Connecticut. This bacterial infection is not contagious but is transmitted by a tick, a tiny, blood-sucking arachnid that hops on to human skin in the countryside, where it is transported by other mammals, particularly deer. There are 476,000, and rising, annual cases in North America alone. Global heating is making ticks, their bacteria – and human illnesses – much more prevalent. (See link for article)

_______________

**Comment**

Another beautiful life side-lined by a bacteria we still know very little about that is infecting people by the millions and chronically affecting the lives untold numbers.

If I had a quarter for every misdiagnosis that was Lyme/MSIDS, I’d be a millionaire.

Will things ever change?

For more:

Category:

Activism, Lyme, Treatment

CABI: Promoting a False Lyme Disease Narrative

https://www.change.org/p/the-us-senate-calling-for-a-congressional-investigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/33928315?

Is CABI promoting a false public health narrative?

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

Over the next week I will be posting correspondence with the management team at the Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International (CABI) regarding a controversial publication offered through CABI’s Digital Library:

Lyme Disease An Evidence-based Approach 3rd Edition
https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/book/10.1079/9781800626225.0000
John Halperin

It is a compilation of misinformation from those who have controlled the Lyme disease narrative for the past three decades. Through CABI, the false narrative is now being propagated worldwide.

———- Original Message ———-
From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: a.robinson@cabi.org, microbialservices@cabi.org
Cc: a.lainsbury@cabi.org, a.thompson@cabi.org, c.ashby@cabi.org, d.bird@cabi.org, h.fielder@cabi.org, j.cullum@cabi.org, j.porciello@cabi.org, r.schoelzel@cabi.org, w.cooper@cabi.org, h.jansen@cabi.org, k.shirley@cabi.org, support@cabi.org
Date: 08/25/2025 8:58 AM EDT
Subject: Is CABI promoting a false public health narrative?

CABI Digital Library

“CABI provides trusted, evidence-based content for researchers and professionals.”

Lyme DiseaseAn Evidence-based Approach 3rd Edition John Halperin

Chapter 16 Chronic Lyme Disease
https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/10.1079/9781800626225.0016
Author: Adriana R. Marques

“The underlying mechanisms driving persistent symptoms after treatment of Lyme disease remain mostly unknown.”  

Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International (CABI)
Andy RobinsonManaging Director, Publishing

Dear Dr. Robinson,

The two NIH funded studies that set the stage for treatment denial (worldwide) had serious flaws in the methodology used to identify the causative agent of Lyme disease. This flawed science has caused unimaginable pain and suffering around the globe. What has been wrongfully established here in the United States has been propagated worldwide and promoted through CABI Digital Library.

Please take a moment to read the following email addressed to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Director of the National Institutes of Health identifying the problem that fueled the controversy over Lyme disease. A copy of this email has been sent to CABI’s Bioscience Services for review.

CABI is a leading provider of microbial and molecular services
https://www.cabi.org/products-and-services/bioscience-services/
“Our standard molecular identification service uses Sanger sequencing.” 

Question: Is CABI promoting a false public health narrative through the promotion of Halperin’s Lyme Disease, An Evidence-based Approach? 
 
A response to this inquiry is requested.

Respectfully submitted,
Carl Tuttle
Independent Researcher
Hudson, NH USA

Email to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya:

———- Original Message ———-
From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: jayanta.bhattacharya@nih.hhs.gov
Cc: adh1@stanford.edu
Date: 08/20/2025 9:14 AM EDT
Subject: Improving Science & Restoring Trust in Public Health | Dr. Jay Bhattacharya

Improving Science & Restoring Trust in Public Health | Dr. Jay Bhattacharya
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y_PxTxLFVg

“We discuss which scientific questions ought to be the priority for NIH, how to incentivize bold, innovative science especially from younger labs, how to solve the replication crisis and restore trust and transparency in science and public health, including acknowledging prior failures by the NIH.” 

To: Jay BhattacharyaDirector of the National Institutes of Health

Dear Dr. Bhattacharya,

Twenty-four years ago, Dr. Mark Klempner’s NIH funded research set the stage for long-term treatment denial when his methodology could not isolate the causative agent responsible for Lyme disease. Although a growing body of peer-reviewed evidence refuted his findings, the Centers for Disease Control refused to acknowledge anything outside of Klempner’s results and turned the disease into a syndrome when patients remained sick after the one size fits all IDSA mandated treatment protocol of 2-4 weeks.

Recent evaluation of Klempner’s methodology has uncovered fatal flaws in his PCR testing for Lyme disease; grants N01-AI-65308 and M01 RR000054.

Two Controlled Trials of Antibiotic Treatment in Patients with Persistent Symptoms and a History of Lyme Disease
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200107123450202#article_references#t=references

Please take a moment if you will to read the following emails sent to Klempner identifying the flaws in his research as described by Dr Sin Lee of Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory, specializing in DNA sequencing-based diagnostics.

Dr. Mark Klempner’s NIH funded research is responsible for unimaginable pain and suffering across America requiring immediate attention by the Director of the National Institutes of Health.

Respectfully submitted,
Carl Tuttle
Independent Researcher
Hudson, NH

Cc: Andrew Huberman, Ph.D. Stanford School of Medicine, Department of Neurobiology

Emails to Dr Mark Klempner: (There has been no response)

———- Original Message ———-
From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: mark.klempner@umassmed.edu
Cc: michael.collins@umassmed.edu, ddutko@hanszenlaporte.com, ryan.kantor@usdoj.gov, michelle.seltzer@usdoj.gov, william.rinner@usdoj.gov, makan.delrahim@usdoj.gov, john.elias@usdoj.gov, NIHResearchIntegrity@mail.nih.gov, support@grants.gov, reviewpolicyofficer@od.nih.gov, AskORI@hhs.gov
Date: 08/17/2025 1:43 PM EDT
Subject: Did Dr Mark Klempner purify samples before PCR in his NIH funded antibiotic treatment trials for Lyme disease grants (N01-AI-65308 and M01 RR000054)

On 04/27/2018 7:53 AM EDT Carl Tuttle <runagain@comcast.net> wrote: “Not a single positive Dr. Klempner? Doesn’t this statistically prove that your methodology was fatally flawed?” 

Dr. Klempner,

As a follow-up to my 2018 inquiry (which you did not respond) I would like to share a recent communication I had with Dr Sin Lee of Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory, specializing in DNA sequencing-based diagnostics. Following his lead, I asked AI a question about your methodology for detecting Borrelia burgdorferi in your NIH funded antibiotic treatment trials for Lyme disease.

Dr. Lee’s question to AI: 

Regarding Sanger Sequencing of Borrelia burgdorferi….

IMR Press   2025 Jun 19

Sanger Sequencing of Borrelia burgdorferi flaB Paralogs Detected Spirochetemia at the Early Localized Stage of Lyme Disease
Sin Hang Lee
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40613208/

-Dr Lee: “Accurate diagnosis of Lyme bacterial infection is the crux of the problem, which cannot be mitigated by mathematics. I asked AI to review my recent publication. Here is what AI says (I never purify any samples before PCR):” 

AI Overview

Yes, you’ve identified a significant risk associated with purifying a single target DNA molecule from a pool of non-target DNA for PCR amplification: 

potential loss of the very target DNA during the purification process.

Here’s why and some considerations:

Why purification can lead to target DNA loss

Multi-step process: DNA purification often involves multiple steps like cell lysis, binding to a matrix, washing, and elution. Each step presents an opportunity for loss, especially with extremely low quantities of starting material.

Low input DNA: When aiming to amplify a single DNA molecule, the initial amount of target DNA is minuscule. Even small inefficiencies at each stage can result in the complete loss of the target DNA before PCR can even begin.

Adsorption and binding inefficiencies: DNA might not bind efficiently to the purification matrix or might be lost during washing steps, especially if there are other cellular components or inhibitors present that interfere with binding.
Mechanical shearing: Some methods involve physical disruption or manipulation, which can damage the delicate DNA molecule and render it unusable for PCR.

Incomplete elution: The elution step, where the purified DNA is released from the matrix, might not be 100% efficient, leaving some target DNA behind.

Strategies to mitigate the risk
 

  • Optimize purification protocols: Careful optimization of buffers, incubation times, washing steps, and elution volumes is crucial to maximize recovery.
  • Use carrier RNA: Adding carrier RNA can improve the efficiency of DNA binding and recovery, particularly with low DNA concentrations.
  • Successive elutions: Performing multiple elution steps can help release more of the bound DNA from the purification matrix.
  • Avoid harsh methods: Consider less harsh purification techniques when working with minute quantities of DNA to minimize shearing and degradation.
  • Specialized kits: Commercial kits specifically designed for low input DNA or single molecule analysis may offer improved recovery rates compared to general DNA purification kits.
  • Direct amplification (where possible): In some cases, if the sample matrix is not highly inhibitory, direct amplification without extensive purification might be considered, although this increases the risk of PCR inhibition and false results.
  • Balancing purification and PCR inhibition

It’s a delicate balance. While purification aims to remove inhibitors that can hinder PCR, overly aggressive or inefficient purification can lead to the loss of the target itself. The choice of purification method and the level of rigor applied depend heavily on the sample type, the expected amount of target DNA, and the downstream PCR application.

Carl Tuttle’s question to AI: 

Did Dr Mark Klempner purify samples before PCR in his NIH funded antibiotic treatment trials for Lyme disease? 

AI Overview 
In a study co-authored by Dr. Mark Klempner, researchers purified PCR products using a commercial kit for sequencing and analysis

Specifically:

-PCR products were purified using the QIAquick PCR purification kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

-The purified samples were then eluted twice, and the eluates were pooled and sequenced.

Dr. Klempner,

Here are your PCR results from those NIH funded treatment trials: (ZERO POSITIVES!!) 

[View chart here:]https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wlt03jb03gdu5whj89tfe/Klempner-PCR-Results.jpg?rlkey=jtobbpx9x5szyf0p5ttra0igf&dl=0

-Dr. Lee: To increase the chances of detecting single copy of Borrelia burfdorferi chromosome (or Osp A gene in a linear plasmid as Klempner et al did) in a specimen, pre-PCR purification risks losing the target DNA. Here is why according to AI (as Klempner et al did) 

AI Overview

When working with low quantities of DNA, especially when purifying a few molecules, silica-membrane-based DNA purification kits can indeed lead to DNA loss

Reasons for DNA loss

  • Inefficient binding: While DNA binds to silica in the presence of chaotropic salts, at very low concentrations, not all DNA molecules may efficiently bind to the silica membrane.
  • Inefficient elution: Eluting DNA from silica can also be inefficient, especially for larger DNA fragments or supercoiled DNA, which bind more tightly to the column’s matrix.
  • Low elution volume: Using a low elution buffer volume can also reduce the final DNA yield.

-Dr Lee: “The biggest flaw in Klempner et al.’s NEJM 2001 publication is the following statement:” 

Base-line specimens of cerebrospinal fluid and plasma specimens obtained at base line and on days 3, 5, 21, and 45 were tested by PCR for the presence of B. burgdorferi DNA, as previously described. [21]

-Dr Lee: In the Results section, they claimed that they found no BB DNA in the blood of the patients. 

They should have known that there is a big difference between blood and plasma. In medicine, plasma is the supernatant of the unclotted whole blood (containing anticoagulants) after centrifugation to spin down the RBCs, WBCs and platelets. Since the authors are experts in Lyme disease, they should have known how Borrelia burgdorferi cells distribute in the blood fractions when being centrifuged. For example, even the Google AI clearly stated the following: 

AI Overview

Yes, it’s generally understood that Borrelia (the bacterium that causes Lyme disease) is significantly heavier than platelets.

AI Overview

Studies have shown that when Borrelia burgdorferi (the bacterium that causes Lyme disease) is introduced into whole blood, it tends to concentrate within the platelet fraction. This suggests that Borrelia may have a similar sedimentation rate to platelets, or that it associates with platelets during the sedimentation process.

Here’s a closer look at what we know about the sedimentation rates of platelets and Borrelia:

Platelet sedimentation

Antisedimentation: Interestingly, platelets don’t actually “sediment” in the traditional sense of settling downwards in response to gravity. Instead, they float on top of the blood column, a phenomenon known as antisedimentation.

-Dr Lee: “The bottom line is that Klempner lost all the Borrelia cells, if any, in the blood specimens before he started his PCR that obviously generated false-negative results.” 

So, Dr. Klempner…. It appears that my original assessment was correct and your methodology was fatally flawed as suspected. Let me remind you that as an NIH funded author, you have a moral obligation to acknowledge mistakes which ultimately set the stage for long-term treatment denial.

A response to this inquiry is requested,
Carl Tuttle
Independent Researcher
Hudson, NH

2018 Inquiry to Dr. Klempner….. 

From: Carl Tuttle [mailto:runagain@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 7:54 AM
To: mark.klempner@umassmed.edu
Cc: michael.collins@umassmed.edu; ddutko@hanszenlaporte.com; ryan.kantor@usdoj.gov; michelle.seltzer@usdoj.gov; william.rinner@usdoj.gov; makan.delrahim@usdoj.gov; Tick-Borne Disease Working Group (OS/OASH); Elias, John; officeofthechancellor@umassmed.edu
Subject: Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease

April 27, 2018

University of Massachusetts Medical School
55 Lake Avenue North
Worcester, Massachusetts 01655
Attn: Mark S. Klempner, MD, Executive Vice Chancellor, MassBiologics

Dr. Klempner,

I would like to call attention to the attached study recently identifying chronic Lyme disease in twelve patients from Canada.

Persistent Borrelia Infection in Patients with Ongoing Symptoms of Lyme Disease
http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/6/2/33

All of these patients were culture positive for infection (genital secretions, skin “Morgellons” and blood) even after multiple years on antibiotics so there was no relief from current antimicrobials. Some of these patients had taken as many as eleven different types of antibiotics.

In contrast, your 2001 antibiotic treatment study found; “no evidence of B. burgdorferi in a total of more than 700 different blood and cerebrospinal fluid samples from the 129 patients in these studies.”

Two Controlled Trials of Antibiotic Treatment in Patients with Persistent Symptoms and a History of Lyme Disease
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200107123450202#article_references#t=references

Not a single positive Dr. Klempner? Doesn’t this statistically prove that your methodology was fatally flawed?

Did you culture skin and genital secretions as the Middelveen paper reports? It would appear that you conveniently stopped looking after your results supported the existing thirty year dogma; chronic Lyme does not exist.

Persistent Lyme disease is not new and has been intentionally/deceitfully suppressed for decades as described in the Vicki Logan case identified in the following letter to past CDC Director Barbara Fitzgerald:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xaul84dqmqgbre0/Brenda%20Fitzgerald%20MD%20Director%20CDC.docx?dl=0
In 1991 B. burgdorferi had been isolated in culture from Vicki Logan’s CSF (CDC’s laboratory in Fort Collins CO.) despite prior treatment with 21 days of IV cefotaxime and 4 months of oral minocycline.

The dishonest science here in the U.S. has denied chronic Lyme which stifled research to find a curative approach. Now the rest of the world is suffering.

We have lost nearly four decades to this 21st century plague due to the racketeering scheme identified in the RICO lawsuit filed by SHRADER & ASSOCIATES, LLP against the Infectious Disease Society of America, seven IDSA Panelists and eight insurance companies. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has aligned itself with the seven IDSA Panelists identified in this lawsuit.

Court Document:
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/LymeDisease.pdf

Lyme is an incurable disease when not treated immediately which is spreading across North America and deceitfully misclassified as a low-risk and non-urgent health issue. Patient experience is describing a disease that is destroying lives, ending careers, causing death and disability while leaving victims in financial ruin. Current antimicrobials are ineffective for eradicating all forms of the Borrelia spirochete.

Public outcry has been ignored for decades while the Centers for Disease Control sat on evidence that this infection was not easily treated with a one size fits all treatment approach as dictated by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Once again your studies were fatally flawed while supporting the controlling dogma leaving hundreds of thousands if not millions worldwide with a persistent infection and absolutely no relief. We have another AIDS on our hands.

Carl Tuttle
Independent Researcher
Lyme Endemic Hudson, NH

Cc: -Michael F. Collins, Chancellor

-The Tick Borne Disease Working Group

-US Department of Justice

-Daniel R. Dutko, HANSZEN LAPORTE

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research, Testing

Podcast on EBOO & TPE

https://www.betterhealthguy.com/episode222

Episode #222: EBOO and TPE: Breakthrough Therapies for Chronic Illness with Dr. Tami Lyday, DO, MS

 
EBOO stands for Extracorporeal Blood Oxygenation and Ozonation & TPE stands for Therapeutic Plasma Exchange.

Watch The Show

Listen To The Show

Find The Show

About My Guest

My guest for this episode is Dr. Tami Lyday.  Tami Lyday, DO, MS has been a physician since 2006 and a functional and integrative specialist since 2017. Prior to that, she spent 11 years as a family practitioner but was never quite satisfied with conventional medical approaches.  Her mother’s illness and subsequent side effects of traditional treatments prompted her to learn more about integrative medicine, and she has not looked back.  Dr. Lyday believes functional and integrative medicine is the best way to ensure lasting recovery as it helps patients determine the root of their health issues and does not rely on medications that treat symptoms while ignoring the underlying causes of illness.  She pursued training and certifications in functional and integrative medicine, including specialty training and certifications in the treatment of mold-related illnesses and Lyme disease. At the time of her certification, she was one of only 26 practitioners in the world who were Shoemaker certified in mold treatment protocols.  After 4 years as a functional and integrative medical practitioner, she opened The Lyday Center to provide a dedicated resource for people who are suffering from mystery illnesses and ailments that don’t respond to conventional treatment and are seeking natural solutions to their chronic illnesses.  Since that time, she has expanded her specialties to include the treatment of thyroid disorders and overall energy levels.  Her mission is to heal the world one patient at a time.

Key Takeaways

  • How much does environmental toxicity contribute to chronic illness?
  • How is a patient tested for mold illness?
  • What binders are most commonly used for detoxification?  Do natural binders have a place?
  • What is the role of Actinobacteria and endotoxins in CIRS patients?
  • Can a patient have fungal colonization and potentially benefit from antifungals?
  • Does treating mold also treat Lyme and coinfections?
  • How important is working on the limbic system to set the stage for healing?
  • How might EBOO and TPE support those with autoimmunity?
  • Where in a recovery timeline do EBOO and TPE best fit?
  • Does Hashimoto’s occur without mold?
  • What is the role of EBOO?  What is the EBOO process?
  • What is done before and after EBOO to support the patient?
  • Can patients have detoxification or Herxheimer reactions after EBOO or TPE?
  • How might EBOO and TPE help those with Long COVID?
  • What types of infections might EBOO support?
  • What is the role of TPE?  What is the TPE process?
  • What types of toxicants and toxins can be filtered out?
  • How is the removed plasma replaced?
  • Might beneficial materials be removed with TPE?
  • Can EBOO or TPE help those with neurodegenerative conditions?

Connect With My Guest

TheLydayCenter.com

(See link for podcast and transcript)

Category:

Activism, Lyme, Treatment