Archive for the ‘research’ Category

Updates and News From Russell Labs – Wisconsin

http://labs.russell.wisc.edu/wisconsin-ticks/

Updates

August, 2018: Nymphal deer ticks are less abundant but still active in Wisconsin right now. About 20-25% of nymphs are infected with the Lyme spirochete. Overall, 2018 has been normal in terms of tick numbers.

Live in Wisconsin and want your tick identified?

 

Take a picture of ticks on your phone and go here:  https://uwmadison.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3s1wBopYCcW0lzT

Wisconsin ticks:  http://labs.russell.wisc.edu/wisconsin-ticks/

Go to link for pictures and information on each.  There are 4 ticks listed including the Lone Star Tick, which was until recently considered a Southern tick but is here as well.  Wisconsin had its first RMSF death, transmitted by the Lone Star Tick, recently:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/07/10/first-rmsf-death-in-wisconsin/

There is also a tab titled “Tick-Borne Diseases.”  Go to link to read about them.  They give WI stats as well.  Please remember ALL the numbers are low as many go unreported:

  • Lyme (Bb or Bm)
  • Borrelia miyamotoi (relapsing fever)
  • Anasplasmosis
  • Ehrlichia muris eauclairensis (EML)
  • Babesiosis
  • Powassan virus/deertick virus
  • Ehrlichia chaffeensis
  • Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever

__________________

A few points stick out to me:

  1. Please take pictures of these ticks & send them in so we finally have an accurate record.  They are asking us for help so let’s give it.  It will only help us in the end.  Flood them with ticks!
  2. Baronella didn’t make the list, yet nearly everyone I work with has it.  WHY?  Because while Bart has been found in ticks, it hasn’t been proven conclusively they transmit.  Bart is a nasty, nasty bug and alone can kill you.  Coupled with Lyme it can make you want to die.
  3. For viruses, they only list Powassan when many more are on record including Heartland and Bourbon (unfortunately they aren’t mandatory to report).  They know Heartland is transmitted by the Lone Star tick but I couldn’t even find the tick supposedly responsible for Bourbon, although it’s a killer:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/07/01/one-tick-bite-could-put-you-at-risk-for-at-least-6-different-diseases/
  4. The lack of data is glaring.  Seriously.  Glaring.  Zika makes front page news here and our mosquitoes can’t even carry it.  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/03/13/wed-nite-the-lab-talk-on-mosquitoes-ticks-disease/  There were only 46 cases of Zika in the U.S. in 2018 – ALL due to travelers returning from affected areas.The CDC “estimates” that there are 300,000 NEW Lyme Disease cases annually in the U.S.  Anyone see a disparity here between Zika and Lyme?  (Other tick-borne diseases aren’t even on the radar yet)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bb Found in Brazilian Primates for the 1st Time

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0036-46652018005000704&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en

Rev. Inst. Med. trop. S. Paulo vol.60  São Paulo  2018  Epub Sep 13, 2018

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1678-9946201860053

Letter to the Editor

Molecular detection of Borrelia burgdorferi in free-living golden headed lion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysomelas) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Aline Vieira Pinheiro dos Santos1  Aline Moreira de Souza1  Marina Galvão Bueno2  3  José Luiz Catao-Dias4  Helena Keiko Toma5  Alcides Pissinati4  6  Camila Vieira Molina2  Maria Cecília Martins Kierulff2  7  Danilo Gomes Freitas Silva2  4  Nádia Regina Pereira Almosny1 

 

Borreliosis is an infectious disease caused by Borrelia spirochetes, transmitted mainly by Ixodes ricinus ticks1 to animals or humans2. The known Borrelia species determine five distinct disease groups: human recurrent fever, avian borreliosis, bovine borreliosis, Lyme borreliosis and bovine scrapie3–6. Lyme disease (LD) is a multisystem disease with a wide geographical distribution and has B. burgdorferi as the main agent in several continents5,7.

In Brazil, borreliosis is called Brazilian Lyme-like disease, Baggio-Yoshinari Syndrome or Brazilian Borreliosis (BB), is transmitted by ticks that are not from the Ixodes ricinus complex, and is caused by B. burgdorferi sensu lato8.

Borrelia species were described in non-human primates that currently serve as an experimental model for Lyme disease2,9–11.

Borrelia species are transmitted primarily by ticks, but in rare cases or experimentally, they can be transmitted by tabanids, culicides and siphonapters12. Studies on borreliosis have been carried out to compare immunological, histopathological and clinical responses of animals and humans infected with Borrelia burgdorferi. In these studies, animals were inoculated or exposed to the Ixodides dammini tick1,9,11, and findings such as conjunctivitis, rash, deep perivascular lymphocytic infiltration that are characteristic in humans1, a large amount of spirochetes in nervous tissue of immunosuppressed animals9 and spirochetes in cardiac tissue10 were reported.

In order to identify arthropod-borne pathogens in an exotic invasive population of Leontopithecus chrysomelas (golden-headed lion tamarin), that inhabit Serra da Tiririca State Park (PESET), an urban Atlantic Rainforest area in Niteroi (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), to translocate them to their native area (Bahia, Brazil), blood samples were analyzed. PESET harbor a large diversity of endemic fauna and flora and is considered an important ecotourism area. Inappropriate housing constructions, the increase of human and animal populations living inside the park or in its surroundings, hunting and inadequate garbage disposal have been recently causing damage to the park13.

This study was approved by the Ethics Commission on Animal Use (CEUA) from Universidade Federal Fluminense (process N° 367, issued in 10/10/2013) and was in full compliance with the federal authorizations issued by the Environment Ministry (SISBIO n 30939-4 issued in 18/05/2012). All procedures were also approved by the Committee on Ethics on Animal Research (CEUA) of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science Faculty of the Universidade de Sao Paulo (Protocol N° 2662/2012 and 7085041215).

Blood samples of 200 L. chrysomelas, males and females, of different ages and independent of clinical alterations were subjected to DNA extraction using the Illustra blood genomic Prep Mini Spin Kit (GE Healthcare Life Sciences, Sao Paulo, Brazil), according to the manufacturer instructions. Extracted DNA was then used as the template DNA in B. burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.) amplifications. Nested Polymerase Chain Reaction (n-PCR) assay using primer 5Bor-out (5′-GTCAAACGGGATGTAGCAA TAC-3′) and 3Bor-out (5′-CACACTTAACACGTTAGCTTCG-3′), followed by a second reaction with primer 5Bor-in (5′-ATTCAGTGGCGAACGGGTG-3′) and 3Bor-in (5′-AACAACGCTCGCCCCTTAC-3′), which amplifies a fragment of 811 bp/ 469 bp of the 16S rRNA gene of B. burgdorferi sensu lato, were performed.

A total of 16% (32/200) L. chrysomelas were positive to B. burgdorferi by n-PCR. Sequencing of five positive samples showed 99% of similarity with B. burgdorferi sequences available in GenBank. This was the first time that borreliosis is found in non- human primates in Brazil.

Borrelia infection in humans was first described in Brazil in 1992, and has an increasing number of suspect cases, differing from LD due to the recurrence rate after treatment and the intense immune response8. The presence of Borrelia burgdorferi in free-living golden-headed lion tamarins that inhabit Atlantic Forest biome of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, confirms that this spirochete is circulating in this region and suggests that these small primates may play a role in transmission of this pathogen to other animals or human beings. Veterinarians and medical doctors should consider this zoonotic pathogen in their diagnostic routine.

Further studies are needed, including sequencing of all positive samples, in order to compare these small primates positive sequences with those of humans and other animals in study area.

REFERENCES

1. Philipp MT, Aydintug MK, Bohm RP Jr, Cogswell FB, Dennis VA, Lanners HN, et al. Early and early disseminated phases of Lyme disease in the rhesus monkey: a model for infection in humans. Infect Immun. 1993;61:3047-59. [ Links ]

2. Soares CO, Ishikawa MM, Fonseca AH, Yoshinari NH. Borrelioses, agentes e vetores. Pesq Vet Bras. 2000;20:1-19. [ Links ]

3. Babour AG, Hayes SF. Biology of Borrelia species. Microbiol Rev. 1986;50:381-400. [ Links ]

4. Quinn PJ, Carter ME, Markey BK, Carter GR. Clinical veterinary microbiology. London: Wolfe; 1994. [ Links ]

5. Wang G, van Dam AP, Le Fleche A, Postic D, Peter O, Baranton G, et al. Genetic and phenotypic analysis of Borrelia valaisiana sp. nov. (Borrelia genomic groups VS116 and M19). Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1997;47:926-32. [ Links ]

6. Zingg BC, LeFebvre RB. Polymerase chain reaction for detection of Borrelia coriaceae, putative agent of epizootic bovine abortion. Am J Vet Res. 1994;55:1509-15. [ Links ]

7. Bennett CE. Ticks and Lyme diseases. Adv Parasitol. 1995;36:343-405. [ Links ]

8. Basile RC, Yoshinari NH, Mantovani E, Bonoldi VN, Macoris DG, Queiroz-Neto A. Brazilian borreliosis with special emphasis on humans and horses. Braz J Microbiol. 2017;48:167-72. [ Links ]

9. Cadavid D, O’Neill T, Schaefer H, Pachner R. Localization of Borrelia burgdorferi in the nervous system and other organs in a nonhuman primate model of Lyme disease. Lab Invest. 2000;80:1043-54. [ Links ]

10. Cadavid D, Bai Y, Hodzic E, Narayan K, Barthold SW, Pachner AR. Cardiac involvement in non-human primates infected with the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi. Lab Invest. 2004;84:1439-50. [ Links ]

11. Roberts ED, Bohm RP Jr, Lowrie RC, Habicht G, Katona L, Piesman J, et al. Pathogenesis of Lyme neuroborreliosis in the rhesus monkey: the early disseminated and chronic phases of disease in the peripheral nervous system. J Infect Dis. 1998;178:722-32. [ Links ]

12. Alvim NC, Bento MA, Martins LA. Borreliose de Lyme: a doença da década. Rev Cient Eletr Med Vet. 2005;4. [ Links ]

13. Instituto Estadual do Ambiente. Resumo executivo: plano de manejo: Parque Estadual da Serra da Tiririca – PESET. Rio de Janeiro: INEA; 2012. [ Links ]

Received: August 13, 2018; Accepted: August 16, 2018

 

THC vs. CBD for Pain: The Differences & Interactions

http://nationalpainreport.com/thc-vs-cbd-for-pain-the-differences-and-interactions-by-winston-peki-8837164.html

THC vs. CBD for Pain: The Differences and Interactions

 

As a natural pain-relief drug, some experts consider cannabis more suitable for your body than the synthetic pharmaceuticals available.

The reasoning behind this is that the body can metabolize natural chemicals better than synthetic ones the same way it can digest natural foods better than processed ones.

Synthetic drugs, as with processed food, can create by-products, which remain as harmful toxins in the body, causing strain on the liver and kidneys. Some (medical) strains of cannabis also provide many health benefits, such as anti-oxidant, anti-depressant, anti-anxiety, pain-suppression, and anti-inflammatory effects.

Not only studies, but many users strongly support the pain-relieving properties of medical marijuana in anecdotal reports. Different types of strains, however, suit different pain conditions, so before diving into medical marijuana use, it’s important to understand the differences.

Let’s look at the difference between the strains of marijuana available, and what their effects are. With the information below, you can hopefully make an informed choice about whether it’s better to use a high-THC or high-CBD strain for your pain relief.

A Brief Overview of THC and CBD

Cannabinoids are the active ingredients specific to the cannabis plant, and they are the compounds primarily responsible for the healing effects. The two most effective and studied cannabinoids are tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD).

There have been 70 cannabinoids identified to date, and there are several others currently being studied, such as cannabigerol (CBG) and tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV).

They are not the only active ingredients, however, and some estimates predict a figure of over 120 active components in the plant. This richness in active compounds is one of the reasons experts consider it useful for treating several ailments.

It is worth noting that THC and CBD also only convert to an effective pain-relieving agent under heat, which is why smoking, vaporizing, or baking it is important.

Most cannabis oils and extracts, designed for direct consumption, haven’t undergone heat treatment. Without heat before ingestion, their effects may not manifest.

The Difference Between THC and CBD

Both THC and CBD contribute to the positive effects associated with marijuana. However, experts only link THC to the strong psychoactive effect known as getting high. This is one of the primary differences between the two components.

The Predominant Effects of High-THC Strains

THC is the primary psychotropic component in marijuana, that is the component responsible for an altered state of mood and perception. This effect makes THC attractive to recreational users.

But THC also contains strong anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties, so it has shown some success in the treatment of pain caused by inflammation, such as arthritis, and cancer.

THC relaxes the nervous system, which helps in spasm-related pain, such as multiple sclerosis. The altered mental state caused by THC can contribute to relieving severe pain in some cases in the same way medicine uses opiates to treat pain.

The Predominant Effects of High-CBD Strains

CBD has received recognition for its anti-carcinogenic qualities. Alongside the lack of feeling “high,” CBD has shown positive anti-inflammatory and pain relief effects. Clinical trials have proven links to suppressing pain receptors from some of the chemical reactions caused by CBD.

CBD has powerful anti-oxidant properties, which also help to support the immune system. Although not considered psychoactive, it can help with the depression, and anxiety sometimes a side-effect of chronic pain.

Cannabidiol Oil and Medical Supplements

Natural cannabis oil supplements are available in capsule and spray forms, as well as oils, which patients can smoke or consume orally. Patients should not confuse medical supplements with the synthetic pharmaceutical varieties, which mimic the effect of cannabis but are not natural. Medical supplements can be pure THC, pure CBD or, so called ‘full-spectrum products’ like CBD oil, which contain ALL the beneficial compounds found in the hemp plant.

The Effects of THC versus CBD in Pain Relief

More clinical trials have linked CBD to positive results for pain relief than THC.

For example:

Chronic Pain. A 2017 report concluded that there was substantial evidence that hih-CBD cannabis-based products are effective for treating chronic pain. Another, separate study published in 2012 in the Journal of Experimental Medicine, suggests that CBD use can lessen both pain and inflammation.

Digestive Pain. CBD has proven it also can help immensely as a digestive aid and digestive pain as well. Researchers have found evidence, as suggested in Cannabinoids for treating inflammatory bowel diseases: where are we and where do we go? that the endocannabinoid system, digestion and CBD have all sorts of interactions. While research involving CBD to treat digestive issues is still in its early beginnings, the experts believe it has the potential to help with all sorts of digestive issues which often come with pain.

Arthritis Pain. Arthritis, which literally means inflammation of the joints, is another condition that CBD oil may be very effective for. Research published in 2016 in the European Journal of Pain found a dramatic reduction in inflammation and signs of pain, without adverse side effects in rats with arthritis after the animals were given a topical gel that contained CBD for four days.

While some studies have shown positive effects of THC on pain relief, particularly for cancer-related pain, the side effects, like altered mental states, make it a less preferred cannabinoid to CBD. Although THC is more effective in muscle-spasm-related pain.

Interactions Between THC and CBD

When looking to reduce your pain, you don’t have to make a choice between THC and CBD. In fact, it could be wise to combine the two. Researchers have found that cannabis really is a synergistic shotgun in the sense that all the compounds in the cannabis plant interact with each other.

Although the exact mechanisms for these interactions remain unclear, the most effective cannabis-based pain treatments have been found to contain a combination of both THC and CBD. So, if your laws and regulations allow, go for a cannabis-based product which contains both compounds in good amounts. Just realize that THC can produce altered mental states, which can be dangerous while doing things that require proper hand-eye coordination like driving.

Choosing a Strain

There are a large range of chemical compositions within the high-THC and high-CBD varieties of cannabis. These can produce different medical effects.

To complicate the matter, the same product can have vastly different results in different people.

When looking for a natural herbal form of cannabis, the sativa strain (cannabis sativa) generally has a higher amount of CBD, whereas the indica strain (cannabis indica) contains more THC. However, due to crossbreeding this is not always reliable. Anecdotal evidence suggests that sativa is more energizing whereas indica is more of a relaxant. This observation may explain some differences that are not specific to the THC or CBD content and why many people prefer indica for pain relief. If you want therapeutic amounts of CBD, always go for a high-CBD strain, this can either be Sativa or Indica.

Conclusion

In medical use for pain relief, doctors prefer the CBD varieties of cannabis extract over THC, primarily due to their lack of side effects. Supplements combining CBD and THC, such as Sativix, have shown the best results in adults in clinical trials. Although experts prefer CBD because it has no side-effects, combining both CBD and THC might be the most effective way to treat pain.

Medical marijuana has fewer risks than other pain-relief medications such as codeine. It also offers more benefit while providing similar pain-relief effects. Since the reactions are incredibly variable and risks of any adverse effect are very low, it is best to discuss options for your pain management with a medical professional and begin with a small dose as a trial. Select the most suitable option for your needs, and let the results quickly manifest themselves.

Winston Peki is a marijuana enthusiast and vaporizer expert. Born and raised in Amsterdam He is the Founder of Herbonaut, an informative vaporizer and cannabis-based products site where you can find vaporizer reviews, CBD oil reviews and more.

_________________

More on CBD derived from marijuana:  

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/06/14/caffeine-more-dangerous-than-cannabis/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2015/05/19/marijuana-the-miracle-herb/

 

 

 

Relapsing Fever Borrelia in California: a Pilot Serological Study

https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S176493 https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S176493

Relapsing fever Borrelia in California: a pilot serological study

Middelveen MJ, Shah JS, Fesler MC, Stricker RB.

International Journal of General Medicine 2018 Sep 21;11:373-382. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

Background

Borrelia spirochetes are tick-borne Gram-negative bacteria that cause disease in humans and animals. Although many studies have focused on Borrelia burgdorferi (Bb), the agent of Lyme disease, recent studies have examined the role of Relapsing Fever Borrelia (RFB) in human disease. In this pilot study, we have evaluated serological reactivity against Bb and RFB in patients residing in California.

Methods

Serological testing for reactivity to Bb and RFB antigens was performed in 543 patients with suspected tick-borne illness using a Western blot technique. Further evaluation of a subset of 321 patients residing in California was obtained. Serum samples were tested for IgM and IgG antibodies reactive with Bb and RFB, and samples were classified by county of residence according to Bb reactivity alone, RFB reactivity alone, and dual reactivity against Bb and RFB. Seroreactivity was ranked in counties with the highest absolute number and the highest prevalence of positive samples.

Results

Of the 543 total serum samples, 32% were positive for Bb, 22% were positive for RFB, and 7% were positive for both Bb and RFB. Of the 321 serum samples from patients residing in California, 33% were positive for Bb, 27% were positive for RFB, and 11% were positive for both Bb and RFB. In the California cohort, the highest rates of positive serological testing for Bb were found in Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties, while the highest rates of positive serological testing for RFB were found in Santa Clara, Alameda, Marin, and San Francisco counties. The highest rates of dual reactivity against Bb and RFB were found in Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Francisco counties. Among the 24 counties with patients who were tested, Bb seropositivity alone was found in four counties, RFB seropositivity alone was found in two counties, and seropositivity for both Bb and RFB was found in 14 counties.

Conclusion

Results of this pilot study suggest that seroreactivity against Bb and RFB is widespread in California, and dual exposure to Bb and RFB may complicate the diagnosis of tick-borne disease. Greater awareness of RFB and broader screening for this tick-borne infection is warranted.

__________________

**Comment**

Recently it was discovered that that new relapsing fever like genomes have links to the Lyme disease borrelia.  Guess patients haven’t been making this up after all:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/10/04/new-relapsing-fever-like-genomes-found-with-links-to-lyme-disease-borrelia/

California patients, similarly to Southern patients, have been told for decades they can’t have Lyme, because it doesn’t exist in their neck of the woods.

That was baloney then and it’s baloney now.
Time to start listening to patients who have far better things to do than fake illness.

https://www.lymedisease.org/relapsing-fever-calif/  (Video abstract of research article in link)  This article states that Relapsing Fever Borrelia (RFB) was thought to only be in Europe and the East Coast of the U.S.  This again demonstrates patients who are complaining of “Lyme-like” symptoms are truly infected with tick borne pathogens of one sort or another.  The one-drug, one-pathogen paradigm does not work with these patients.  Approved FDA testing BTW, doesn’t even exist for RFB.

“A negative Lyme test does not rule out the possibility of infection with Relapsing Fever Borrelia, and clinicians should be familiar with disease presentation and available diagnostic tests.”  Melissa Fesler, nurse practitioner

“Tick-borne Relapsing Fever is the next wave of Lyme disease,” says Stricker. “It’s not just a simple disease anymore.”

This again, demonstrates the importance of being educated on ALL TBI’s, and understanding that ALL TBI diagnosis is clinical.  Testing is abysmal.

For more on California and tick borne illness:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/06/23/say-what-california-fifth-in-nation-for-lyme-insurance-claims/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/05/19/infected-ticks-in-california-its-complicated/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/08/07/california-lyme-cases-get-no-respect/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/02/02/miyamotoi-in-ixodes-pacificus-in-california/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/02/15/b-miyamotoi-in-ca-ticks-for-a-long-time/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/02/14/borrelia-miyamotoi-in-ca-serodiagnosis-is-complicated-by-multiple-endemic-borrelia-species/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/10/09/bb-in-california-chipmunk-and-squirrels/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2011/09/25/putting-lyme-behind-you-questions-and-answers-with-california-lyme-doctors/

For interested practitioners on HOW to become educated:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/06/06/lyme-education-for-healthcare-professionals/

 

Increase of Infected Ticks Means Higher Risk of Tick Bites

https://www.lymedisease.org/lymesci-tick-bites/  (Please see comment at end of article)

LYMESCI: Increase of infected ticks means higher risk of tick bites

by Lonnie Marcum

More ticks in more places means more tick bites.
More tick bites resulting in more sick people.

That’s the result the Entomological Society of America (ESA) was trying to avoid, when in 2015, it published a “Position Statement on Tick-Borne Diseases.”

The article describes a multitude of factors that have created a near “perfect storm,” leading to more infected ticks in more places throughout the United States.

Along with other steps, the ESA recommended engaging the help of citizen-scientists. In 2016, the Bay Area Lyme Foundation (BALF) decided to do just that. The results of this groundbreaking nationwide project have recently been published—and the news is NOT GOOD!

Among many disturbing facts, the new study found blacklegged ticks —carriers of 7 of 18 US tick-borne diseases—in 83 counties where they had never previously been recorded.

More tick bites = more sick people

Ticks have undergone a population explosion over the past two decades, with Ixodes ticks, the primary source of Lyme disease, now found in nearly 50% more U.S. counties than in 1996.

“Since the late 1990s, the number of counties in the northeastern United States that are considered high-risk for Lyme disease has increased by more than 320%,” says Rebecca Eisen from the Division of Vector-Borne Diseases at the CDC. “The tick is now established in areas where it was absent 20 years ago,” she adds.

The reasons for the explosion of tick populations involves complex human and environmental factors and varies by geographic region. Experts feel the major contributing factors are:

  • Warming winter temperatures
  • Migratory bird patterns
  • Changes in landscape, land use and fragmented forests
  • Abundance of vertebrate hosts (mice, deer, squirrels, etc)
  • Reduction in natural predators (foxes, bobcats, etc.)
  • Invasive and non-native plant species
  • Accidental transport by humans (pets, livestock)

With the increase in ticks, we’ve seen a sharp rise in tick bites and tick-borne diseases, with reports of Lyme disease now coming from all 50 states, costing upwards of $75 billion per year.

What’s being done?

While the CDC lists Lyme disease as a nationally notifiable disease, the responsibility for reporting falls to each state’s health departments. The fact is, many states do not (or can’t) enforce these reporting requirements.

In addition to Lyme disease, the CDC lists six other tick-borne diseases as reportable—anaplasmosis, babesiosis, ehrlichiosis, spotted fever rickettsiosis (including Rocky Mountain spotted fever), and tularemia. Again, many states don’t put resources in tracking these illnesses.

The lack of accurate disease reporting leads to a reduction in public health awareness and medical education in areas where it’s needed. This then hinders a patient’s access to timely and accurate diagnosis and early treatment—which are absolutely critical to a good prognosis.

Citizen scientists collect ticks

BALF’s recently published tick study invited citizens from all over the US to send ticks to Northern Arizona University (NAU) for free testing, with the goal of mapping ticks and the diseases they carry.

Many Lyme advocacy groups helped spread the word. For instance, there were more than 16,000 website hits on LymeDisease.org’s announcement about the project.

Researchers had expected that maybe 2,400 ticks would be sent in. To their astonishment, they received over 16,000 ticks collected from 49 states and Puerto Rico. No ticks were received from Alaska.

As lead author Nate Nieto, PhD, associate professor in NAU’s Department of Biological Sciences, explains,

“This study offers a unique and valuable perspective because it looks at risk to humans that goes beyond the physician-reported infection rates and involves ticks that were found on or near people.”

This represents the first nationwide tick study with the goal of mapping the prevalence of disease-carrying ticks throughout the United States. During the period from January 2016 through August 2017, people could send ticks to NAU, free of charge, for testing of the most common tick-borne infections:

  • Borrelia burgdorferi, the cause of Lyme disease,
  • Borrelia miyamotoi, which causes tick-borne relapsing fever (TBRF), a Lyme-like illness,
  • Anaplasma phagocytophilum, the cause of granulocytic anaplasmosis, and
  • Babesia microti, the protozoan parasite that causes Babesiosis.
The Findings
  • Over 70% of submissions were the result of human tick bites.
  • Blacklegged ticks were found in 83 counties (in 24 states) where they had not previously been recorded.
  • All four pathogens tested for (Anaplasma, Babesia, Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia miyamotoi) were found in all three of the most commonly encountered hard-ticks species collected (deer tick, American dog tick, lone star tick).
  • Some ticks tested positive for up to three pathogens (no ticks contained all four).
  • All life stages of these three hard-tick species, including some larvae, were found to be infected with both Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia miyamotoi.
  • On the East Coast, B. burgdorferi, the cause of Lyme disease, was predominantly detected in adult Ixodes scapularis (deer tick).
  • On the West Coast, B. burgdorferi was highest in larval Ixodes pacificus (western blacklegged tick).
  • The highest prevalence of Borrelia miyamotoi (a relapsing fever species Borrelia that causes Lyme-like illness) was found in larval ticks in the western US.
  • Babesia was found in lone star ticks in 26 counties (in 10 states) where public health departments do not require reporting.
  • Several Amblyomma americanum, commonly known as the lone star tick and capable of carrying bacteria that cause disease in humans, were found in Northern California, the first known report of this tick in the state.

tick-bite-map

Tick bite map of US

Limits of the Study

While the study was hugely successful, it did have some limits. For one, the sample of ticks was limited to only those areas where citizens were participating, therefore the maps may not show all areas with ticks.

In addition, the researchers only tested for four of the many pathogens known to cause illness in humans.

Pathogens not tested for include: Multiple species of Borrelia including Mayonii, and Bisettii, which also cause Lyme-like illness; Ehrlichia chaffeensis, the cause of human monocytic erhlichiosis; Francisella tularensis, the cause of tularemia; Rickettsia rickettsii, the bacterial agent of Rocky Mountain spotted fever; multiple species of the protozoan pathogen Babesia, including duncani and divergens; and several viruses known to be transmitted by ticks including Bourbon virus, Colorado tick fever virus, Heartland virus, and Powassan virus.

Lack of funding for more studies

Lack of funding poses the biggest challenge to fully understanding the risks that ticks pose to the US population.

When asked, the CDC’s Ben Beard stated

“We’ve got national maps, but we don’t have detailed local information about where the worst areas for ticks are located.…The reason for that is there has never been public funding to support systematic tick surveillance efforts.”

It’s no secret that within weeks of the first Zika infection in 2016, Congress authorized $1.7 billion in funding, of which $397 million was made immediately available to rapidly develop an accurate test and begin work on a vaccine.

That same year, the federal budget allotted only $28 million for Lyme disease—the most common vector-borne disease in the US. (Note: while the CDC can study and report on diseases, it is not allowed to lobby Congress for funding.)

What did we learn?

The big take-away from the NAU study is that ticks are everywhere, and they are full of dangerous pathogens—not just Lyme disease. This study demonstrates that ticks are spreading in range, and they are carrying more pathogens than ever before.

Until we find better ways for the CDC to report illnesses, these type of risk maps, that are generated from the pathogens the ticks are carrying, will be the best predictor of disease.

Finally, we all need to get out there and tell our representatives the dangers that lurk in our backyards. Call them. Ask to meet with them. Bring them a copy of this report. Let them know we need an dramatic increase in funding for Lyme and tick-borne diseases.

Click here for more information about ticks:  https://www.lymedisease.org/lyme-basics/ticks/about-ticks/

LymeSci is written by Lonnie Marcum, a Licensed Physical Therapist and mother of a daughter with Lyme. Follow her on Twitter: @LonnieRhea Email her at: lmarcum@lymedisease.org .

References:

  1. Using citizen science to describe the prevalence and distribution of tick bite and exposure to tick-borne diseases in the United States, PLOSone, July 2018,  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199644
  2. County-Scale Distribution of Ixodes scapularis and Ixodes pacificus (Acari: Ixodidae) in the Continental United States , Journal of Medical Entomology, Volume 53, Issue 2, 1 March 2016, Pages 349–386,  https://academic.oup.com/jme/article/53/2/349/2459744
  3. Entomological Society of America Position Statement on Tick-Borne Diseases Approved on July 29, 2015, Valid through July 29, 2019  http://www.entsoc.org/PDF/2015/ESA-PolicyStatement-TickBorneDiseases.pdf
  4. Report of the Disease Vectors, Surveillance, and Prevention Subcommittee to the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group  https://www.hhs.gov/ash/advisory-committees/tickbornedisease/reports/disease-vectors-2018-5-9/index.html

_________________

**Comment**

Canadian independent tick researcher, John Scott, stands in opposition to the climate change model affecting tick movement:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/08/13/study-shows-lyme-not-propelled-by-climate-change/  A recent study shows that warm winters are lethal to I. scapularis (black-legged) ticks. In fact, overwinter survival dropped to 33% when the snow melted. This has been substantiated by other researchers as well. Scott & Scott, 2018, ticks and climate change, JVSM

Also, illogically, people on one hand admit that ticks are now “everywhere” but keep pushing the importance of geographical maps.  Why?  These maps are worthless & constantly changing.  Migratory birds are transiting ticks worldwide along with the fox, coyote, lizard, mouse, and 1,000 other carriers including humans traveling everywhere.

Why do we continue to push and believe in maps that have kept people from diagnosis and treatment for decades?

I’ll tell you why – it’s lining pockets with money.

Authorities look at the inaccurate and constantly changing maps and announce,
“You can’t have ______________, it doesn’t exist here.”

More data that actually hurts patients.

This tick border thing is a man-made constructed paradigm that has never been accurate, but it fits the CDC/NIH/IDSA narrative. http://steveclarknd.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/The-Confounding-Debate-Over-Lyme-Disease-in-the-South-DiscoverMagazine.com_.pdf (go to page 6 and read about Speilman’s maps which are faulty but have ruled like the Iron Curtain, and have been used to keep folks from being diagnosed and treated)

Dr. Masters fought this tooth and nail for his suffering patients in the South:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/10/06/remembering-dr-masters-the-rebel-for-lyme-patients-who-took-on-the-cdc-single-handedly/  Even though Fier found borrelia in 2% of sampled lone star ticks and subsequently supported Masters’ Missouri Lyme, the CDC insisted that the EM rash was NOT diagnostic for LD for Missouri patients due to the fact that neither Ixodes dammini nor Ixodes pacificus were found there.  

Maps are continually used against patients and have ALWAYS been faulty:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2017/08/24/canine-maps-better-than-the-cdcs-in-predicting-lyme-disease/ (nothing’s changed)

TIME TO PULL THE BLINDERS OFF AND LOOK AT THIS THING AS THE PANDEMIC IT TRULY IS, AND TIME TO FOCUS ON ISSUES THAT ACTUALLY RELIEVE PATIENT SUFFERING.