Tag Archives: Carl Tuttle

Lyme Carditis

From: “Carl Tuttle” <runagain@comcast.net>
To: hboucher@tuftsmedicalcenter.org
Cc: mmelia4@jhmi.edu, ElsevierClinics@elsevier.com, aiim-office@meduniwien.ac.at, usbkinfo@elsevier.com, journalscustomerservice-usa@elsevier.com, Roosen@elsevier.com, “y chi” <y.chi@elsevier.com>, “m seeley” <m.seeley@elsevier.com>, “r mobed” <r.mobed@elsevier.com>, “Dick Blumenthal” <Dick_Blumenthal@blumenthal.senate.gov>, bonacic@senate.state.ny.us, hannon@nysenate.gov, “matt sheehey” <matt.sheehey@mail.house.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 9:37:05 AM
Subject: Lyme Carditis, Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc.

Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2015 Jun;29(2):255-268. doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2015.02.003.

Lyme Carditis.

Robinson ML1, Kobayashi T2, Higgins Y2, Calkins H3, Melia MT4.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25999222

Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

May 26, 2015

Infectious Disease Clinics

Consulting Editor:
Helen W. Boucher, MD, FIDSA, FACP

 

To the Editors:

 

There are serious concerns regarding a number of comments found in the Johns Hopkins abstract on Lyme Carditis:

Johns Hopkins Comment #1“Lyme disease is a common disease that uncommonly affects the heart.”

In reference to the Johns Hopkins propaganda piece on Lyme Carditis I would like to call attention to the following studies:

In August of 2012 the CDC announced that the number of Lyme disease cases could be off by a factor of ten adjusting the number to 300,000 new cases annually. The results of the 2014 Lyme Carditis study below was based on 30,000 annual cases from 2001-2010 and must also be off by a factor of ten. The numbers presented in this CDC report are not likely to be representative of the true extent of the problem.

Update on Lyme Carditis, Groups at High Risk, and Frequency of Associated Sudden Cardiac Death — United States

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/834162

Here’s what the numbers look like when considering the miscalculation over the same nine year period: (2001–2010)

18,760 cases of Lyme carditis.

  7,020 died from all causes within a year of Lyme disease diagnosis.

      50 were classified as suspected cases of Lyme carditis–associated mortality.

This study also reports 42% of patients had an accompanying erythema migrans (bulls-eye rash). That’s substantially less than the CDC’s 60%-80% claim as found on the CDC’s 2011 Case Definition page:

http://wwwn.cdc.gov/NNDSS/script/casedef.aspx?CondYrID=752&DatePub=1/1/2011%2012:00:00%20AM

The following study reports the deaths of three seemingly healthy individuals who dropped dead from Lyme Carditis. It is important to recognize here that the cause of death was only identified due to the fact that the three Lyme patients were potential organ donors otherwise these cases would not have been identified or reported. We have to ask the question, “How many seemingly healthy Lyme patients have donated blood?” (Our blood supply is not screened for Lyme disease)

Three Sudden Cardiac Deaths Associated with Lyme Carditis — United States,

December 13, 2013 / 62(49);993-996

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6249a1.htm

Additional study:

Lyme disease: A case report of a 17-year old male with fatal Lyme carditis

E. Yoon correspondence, E. Vail, G. Kleinman, P.A. Lento, S. Li, G. Wang, R. Limberger, J.T. Fallon

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25864163

Johns Hopkins Comment #2  “Like other manifestations of Lyme disease, carditis can readily be managed with antibiotic therapy and supportive care measures, such that affected patients almost always completely recover.”

Since we do not have a lab test to gauge treatment failure or success how do we know for certain that those who do not recover aren’t dealing with antibiotic resistant infection?

There appears to be a deliberate and coordinated downplay of the seriousness of Lyme disease with its life altering consequences. The Johns Hopkins article is no exception to the ongoing deception.

Respectfully submitted,

Carl TuttleHudson, NH 03051

Website: New Hampshire Lyme Misdiagnosis

Petition: Calling for a Congressional investigation of the CDC, IDSA and ALDF

Letter to the Editor, The Lancet Infectious Diseases Published May 2012

Additional References:

1. Undetected Lyme disease nearly killed Duke researcher
http://www.wral.com/lifestyles/healthteam/story/8331364/

Fatal Lyme carditis and endodermal heterotopia of the atrioventricular node.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2429516/

2. Fatal pancarditis in a patient with coexistent Lyme disease and babesiosis. Demonstration of spirochetes in the myocardium.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4040723

3. Lyme borreliosis as a cause of myocarditis and heart muscle disease.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1915460

4. Cardiac Lyme disease – case report – A Fatality confirmed with Autopsy PCR study

Postmortem confirmation of Lyme carditis with polymerase chain reaction.

http://umaryland.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/postmortem-confirmation-of-lyme-carditis-with-polymerase-chain-reaction%2896d9181d-9d52-4fc7-9149-287cd0123f84%29.html

5. Unclassified cardiomyopathy or Lyme carditis? A three year follow-up.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23575786

Letter to Mary Jo M Dales – Editor IMNG Medical Media

Mary Jo M. Dales

Editor in Chief

IMNG Medical Media

Dear Mary Jo,

In Evidence-based medicine, (EBM) medical treatment remains subject to patient values so why do the CDC and IDSA refuse to listen to the patient voice concerning Lyme disease?; to intentionally avoid the “inconvenient truths”.

The following “inconvenient truths” are heard at Lyme disease support group meetings:

1. The vast majority of patients do not develop the bulls-eye rash.

2. The two stage testing (Elisa followed by Western blot) recommended by the CDC and IDSA is not working. Most patients are negative by Elisa but positive on Western blot.

3. Patients are often ping ponged through the medical community for years before obtaining a diagnosis due to the insufficiently educated (confused) medical community regarding the diagnosis of Lyme disease.

4. Short term treatment of antibiotics as recommended by the IDSA does not address the late stage Lyme patient and is less than adequate for the acute stage.

5. Lyme patients are misdiagnosed with the chronic diseases of our time; Multiple Sclerosis, Lupus, Lou Gehrig’s, disease, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s disease, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Fibromyalgia.

6. Lyme patients are never informed of the two standards of care for treating the disease; IDSA vs. ILADS.

Deliberately avoiding the inconvenient truths has been an effective campaign to mislead a medical community and the public but Senator Blumenthal believes Lyme patients should have a voice and is currently collecting testimonies from across America. Ignore patient complaints and you can deny the late stage Lyme epidemic indefinitely.

When obtaining medical advice for Lyme disease be sure to ask the question, “Have you ever treated the late stage Lyme patient?

Regards,

Carl Tuttle

Letter to Jerry Leonard

Jerry Leonard

Charlotte, North Carolina
jerryleonard999@yahoo.com

Re: An Open Letter to State Leaders

Dear Jerry,

I received an email from an individual in the UK who prefers to stay anonymous but attached a timeline document with a great deal of information similar to what you presented in your open letter to state leaders but with a UK origin. I found the following information from that document quite disturbing:

1. Vaccine development for Lyme disease requires samples from untreated and late stage Lyme patients.

2. In July 1994, SmithKlein Beecham (Now GlaxoSmithKline) filed a Lyme Disease vaccine patent for OspA proteins of Borrelia burgdorferi. In table 1 & table 4 this patent demonstrates the need for human blood, skin and spinal fluid from untreated Lyme disease patients including the late stage presentation Acrodermatitis Chronica Atrophans (ACA) which is a feature of European Lyme disease and usually presents about 20 years after initial tick bite.

My interpretation: If you immediately treat all Lyme disease without restriction where do you find a population of late stage Lyme patients?

The lead author (As you point out) of the IDSA’s “treatment-denial” guidelines for Lyme disease Gary Wormser and Susan O’Connell over in the UK both have links to the Baxter vaccine that is going into its phase 3 clinical trial. Your interpretation: Large-scale treatment-denial experiment to create a vaccine market by the national security infrastructure? ……lead author of the foremost study used to justify this treatment-denial philosophy (Mark Klempner) and the lead author of the treatment guidelines which are used to deny Lyme victims effective treatment (Gary Wormser) are all biowarfare researchers and/or biowarfare epidemiologists. Two of these individuals (Klempner, Barbour) are biowarfare lab directors. Three of them have led Lyme vaccine efforts (Barbour, Steere, Wormser). This is all making more sense now and certainly offers an explanation for the purposeful mishandling of this disease and continuous disinformation campaign along with the deliberate refusal to listen to the patient voice.

If not a congressional investigation how do we expose and correct what has been ongoing for so long at these levels?

Sincerely,

Carl Tuttle

Comparison of Lyme Disease Prevalence and Disease Reporting in an Endemic Area

http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.microbiology.20130306.11.html#Sec5

Journal of Microbiology Research

doi:10.5923/j.microbiology.20130306.11

Holly Ahern Biology Department, State University of New York at Adirondack, Queensbury, NY, 12804, USA

Carl Tuttle’s summary of this significant study:

The Lyme community has been reporting a completely different set of numbers in regards to the statistics of this disease which vary greatly from what the CDC has published and conveyed to the medical community.

Professor Ahern’s survey results were tabulated from a randomly selected population in a Lyme endemic region with no bias in this group to influence results.

2% of the surveyed population reported a diagnosis of Lyme disease. 50% of respondents diagnosed with Lyme disease did not recall a tick bite, 33% developed the bulls-eye rash and 50% remained ill after antibiotic treatment.

In contrast to those numbers the CDC claims that 80% of Lyme patients develop the bulls-eye rash and only a small subset of patients has persistent symptoms.

It was concluded that Lyme disease reported at just 2% of the population for these three counties represents a possible 7,000 cases at the time of the survey but only 1,930 cases have been reported to the CDC over a nine year period (2002-2011). If you use the 2% conservative number there should have been 63,000 cases reported in just these three counties alone.

In addition, 16% of respondents experienced cardiac, rheumatologic, or neurological symptoms consistent with late-stage Lyme disease.

Comparing late-stage Lyme symptoms to the general population was a brilliant idea because we believe the vast majority of Lyme patients are already in the healthcare system being treated for everything else but Lyme.

Chronic disease is a valuable commodity and there is a high probability that undiagnosed Lyme disease represents a good portion of that that revenue stream.

Please continue to forward this petition to educate others!

Petition: Calling for a Congressional investigation of the CDC, IDSA and ALDF

Lyme Disease DNA Testing

Jan 17, 2014

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Editor-in-Chief, Sherwood L. Gorbach, M.D

Dear Dr Gorbach,

The Molecular Diagnostics Department of Milford Medical Laboratory recently announced a DNA Sequencing-based diagnostic test for Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia miyamotoi.

BREAKING NEWS: Jan. 15, 2014 – BusinessWire Press Release

Lyme Disease DNA Testing

http://www.dnalymetest.com/faq.html

Statement from Milford Medical Laboratory:

“……spirochetes will not stay in the blood of the patient for long because they prefer to live in the deep tissues, such as the joints, the heart and the nervous system. The window of opportunity to find the spirochetes in the blood is narrow….”

In reference to Dr Alan Steere’s study recently published in Clinical Infectious Diseases I would like to point out the following statements from his study:

“….all post-treatment culture results were negative…”

“….suggesting that spirochetal eradication had occurred with treatment in all patients.”

So is Dr Alan Steere not aware that the “spirochetes will not stay in the blood of the patient for long” or has he rushed to conclusion here to support his renowned bias against persistent infection as I highlighted in my letter to the editor?

I would like to point out a recent article found in Forbes:

Medicine Or Mass Murder? Guideline Based on Discredited Research May Have Caused 800,000 Deaths In Europe Over The Last 5 Years

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2014/01/15/medicine-or-mass-murder-guideline-based-on-discredited-research-may-have-caused-800000-deaths-in-europe-over-the-last-5-years/

The article focuses on the damage caused by the disgraced Dutch cardiovascular researcher Don Poldermans who was fired for scientific misconduct. A follow-up article will focus on the institutional leaders who provided uncritical support as well as the role of journal editors in this case.

A comment following the article struck a chord with me:

“There is, it has now become clear, a general lack of concern and response to evidence of scientific fraud and misconduct. Journal editors, deans, department chairs, and others seem more concerned with protecting the reputation of their respective institutions than aggressively upholding the integrity of science and research.”

Dr Gorbach…… per your reply to me, one of the reasons you decided not to publish my letter to the editor was as follows: “it represents a personal, not a scientific, attack on Dr. Steere…” It would appear that reputation overrides integrity.

Spinning the data to support one’s bias jeopardizes the integrity of the Journal in which the research is published. Dr Alan Steere holds steadfast to the idea that he can fool all of the people all of the time with authorization to do so.

Sincerely,

Carl Tuttle

Hudson, NH 03051

Recognizing Lyme Carditis CDC Expert Commentary, Medscape Dr Forrester’s “CDC Expert Commentary

From: “Carl Tuttle” <runagain@comcast.net>

To: editor2@webmd.net

Cc: “m dales” <m.dales@elsevier.com>, “abi cantor” <abi.cantor@lancet.com>, “john mcconnell” <john.mcconnell@lancet.com>, “marcia balisciano” <marcia.balisciano@reedelsevier.com>, comments@nejm.org, news@medscape.net, circ@circulationjournal.org, “Robert Becker” <Robert.Becker@wolterskluwer.com>, info@wolterskluwer.com, dschlanger@webmd.net, avuolo@webmd.net, “richard horton” <richard.horton@lancet.com>, xdd2@cdc.gov

Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 10:40:19 AM

Subject: Recognizing Lyme Carditis CDC Expert Commentary, Medscape

 

Recognizing Lyme Carditis

Joseph D. Forrester, MD, MSc

January 13, 2014

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/818773

To the Editors of Medscape,

In reference to Dr Forrester’s “CDC Expert Commentary” I would like to point out a few discrepancies.

1. Dr Forrester’s comment:

“More than 30,000 cases are reported annually in the United States.”

As of August 2013 the CDC announced that Lyme disease cases are ten times higher:

(Dr Forrester must not have received the memo)

CDC estimates Lyme disease hits 300,000 each year

2. Dr Forrester’s comment:

“second- or third-degree heart block occurs in approximately 1% of patients about whom clinical details are available”

If case numbers are off by a factor of ten it would certainly make sense that this estimate is questionable.

3. Dr Forrester’s comment:

“cases were identified in conjunction with a tissue bank and state and local health departments”

It is important to recognize here that the cause of death was only identified due to the fact that the three Lyme patients were potential organ donors otherwise these cases would not have been identified or reported.

4. Dr Forrester’s comment:

“Only 40% patients with Lyme carditis report having erythema migrans rash, as compared with 70%-80% of patients overall”

A recent published study independent of the CDC or its influence uncovered what the Lyme disease community has known all along as results were tabulated from a randomly selected population in a Lyme endemic region with no bias in this group to influence results:

Comparison of Lyme Disease Prevalence and Disease Reporting in an Endemic Area

http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.microbiology.20130306.11.html#Sec5

2% of the surveyed population reported a diagnosis of Lyme disease. 50% of respondents diagnosed with Lyme disease did not recall a tick bite, only 33% developed the bulls-eye rash and 50% remained ill after antibiotic treatment.

In contrast to those numbers the CDC claims that 80% of Lyme patients develop the bulls-eye rash and only a small subset of patients has persistent symptoms.

In addition, 16% of respondents experienced cardiac, rheumatologic, or neurological symptoms consistent with late-stage Lyme disease.

Comparing late-stage Lyme symptoms to the general population was a brilliant idea because we believe the vast majority of Lyme patients are already in the healthcare system being treated for everything else but Lyme.

The “CDC Expert Commentary” series on Medscape is little more than a propaganda effort by the CDC to maintain the illusion that our nation’s health protection agency has “got everything under control” but the more they publish the more obvious it becomes; Lyme disease has been grossly mismanaged.

Respectfully submitted,

Carl Tuttle

Spinning the data to support vaccine development

From: “Carl Tuttle” <runagain@comcast.net>

To: “Clinical Infectious Diseases” <cid@tufts.edu>

Cc: CID-editor@tufts.edu, “sherwood gorbach” <sherwood.gorbach@tufts.edu>, “michael barza” <michael.barza@tufts.edu>, scosgro1@jhmi.edu, ethics@harvard.edu, “David Linsky” <David.Linsky@mahouse.gov>, “Dick Blumenthal” <Dick_Blumenthal@blumenthal.senate.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 3:14:49 PM

Subject: Re: CID MS 73416

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Editor-in-Chief, Sherwood L. Gorbach, M.D

Dr Gorbach,

In the ongoing effort to preserve the narrow/restrictive case definition of Lyme disease it has become noticeably evident that Clinical Infectious Diseases has been utilized as a springboard for the the disinformation/bias campaign allowed to progress with unabated intensity.As stated in a previous email Dec 13th…….

“It has become blatantly obvious that the CDC will go to great lengths to insure that Lyme disease remains within its narrow definition in order to fit the vaccine model. Chronic Lyme does not fit any vaccine model.”

Clinical Infectious Diseases article:

The Need for a New Lyme Disease Vaccine

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/suppl_3/NP.1.full

Volume 52 suppl 3 February 1, 2011 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciq124

Guest Editors: Stanley A. Plotkin, MD

Gary P. Wormser, MD

This supplement is sponsored by Baxter Laboratories, the Centers for Disease Control, Fort Collins, CO, and Stanley Plotkin.

There is no abstract attached to this CID link?? Why?

Wormser, Plotkin, the CDC and Baxter laboratories all participating in the denial of the late stage Lyme epidemic; a result of a vaccine initiative duped as the cure-all to this world wide epidemic which continues to spread across America and other countries.

While we are on the subject of denialism here are a few references for your review:

Congenital Transmission of Lyme: 28 Peer-Reviewed Studies

Persistent Lyme infection: 273 Peer-Reviewed Studies

Seronegativity in Lyme borreliosis: 103 Peer-Reviewed Studies

“If false results are to be feared, it is the false negative result which holds the greatest peril for the patient.”

Quote posted to the petition site:

“In the fullness of time, the mainstream handling of chronic Lyme disease will be viewed as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of medicine because elements of academic medicine, elements of government and virtually the entire insurance industry have colluded to deny a disease.”

In the not to distant future the truth will be revealed when those responsible are subpoenaed to testify under oath. In the meantime studies (junk science) published in CID by these individuals continue to expose their efforts of spinning the data to support the group’s initiative: vaccine development.

Sincerely,

Carl Tuttle

 

A Systematic Review of Borrelia burgdorferi Morphologic Variants Does Not Support a Role in Chronic Lyme Disease

From: “Carl Tuttle” <runagain@comcast.net>
To: “Clinical Infectious Diseases” <cid@tufts.edu>
Cc: cid3@tufts.edu, CID-editor@tufts.edu, “sherwood gorbach” <sherwood.gorbach@tufts.edu>, “michael barza” <michael.barza@tufts.edu>, scosgro1@jhmi.edu, asteere@partners.org, kstrle@partners.org,ethics@harvard.edu,

“David Linsky” <David.Linsky@mahouse.gov>, “Dick Blumenthal” <Dick_Blumenthal@blumenthal.senate.gov>

To: “Clinical Infectious Diseases” <cid@tufts.edu>

Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:26:22 PM

Subject: Re: CID MS 73416

Dear Dr Gorbach,

Here is yet another example of junk science published in Clinical Infectious Diseases aimed at denying the existence of persistent infection.

A Systematic Review of Borrelia burgdorferi Morphologic Variants Does Not Support a Role in Chronic Lyme Disease

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/12/12/cid.cit810.abstract

Conclusion from the “Three Amigos” abstract: (Lantos, Auwaerter and Wormser)

Conclusions.”In the context of the broader medical literature it is not currently possible to ascribe a pathogenic role to morphologic variants of  B. burgdorferi in either typical manifestations of Lyme disease or in other chronic disease states that are often labeled chronic Lyme disease. There is no clinical literature to justify specific treatment of B. burgdorferi morphologic variants.”

Studies on the Cystic Form of Borrelia burgdorferi Mechanisms of Persistence

http://www.samento.com.ec/sciencelib/4lyme/studiesoncyst.pdf

Effects of Penicillin, Ceftriaxone, and Doxycycline on Morphology of Borrelia burgdorferi

Date of Publication: May, 1995

Source: Antimicrobial Agents & Chemotherapy, 39(5):1127-33

Authors: Kersten A; Poitschek C; Rauch S; Aberer E.

Institution: Department of Dermatology, University of Vienna, AustriaAbstract

Antibiotic therapy with penicillin, doxycycline, and ceftriaxone has proven to be effective for the treatment of Lyme borreliosis. In some patients, however, it was noticed that borreliae can survival in the tissues in spite of seemingly adequate therapy. For a better understanding of this phenomenon, we investigated the different modes of degeneration of Borrelia burgdorferi suspensions during a 96-h exposure to various antibiotics. By dark-field microscopy and ultrastructural investigations,increasing blebbing and the gradual formation of granular and cystic structures could be followed during the exposure time. Although antibiotic concentrations at the MIC at which 90% of organisms are inhibited after 72 h were 80% or even greater, motile organisms were still present after incubation with penicillin and doxycycline but not after incubation with ceftriaxone. By transmission electron microscopy, intact spirochetal parts, mostly situated in cysts, were seen up to 96 h after exposure with all three antibiotics tested. According to experiences from studies with other spirochetes it is suggested that encysted borreliae, granules, and the remaining blebs might be responsible for the ongoing antigenic stimulus leading to complaints of chronic Lyme borreliosis.

——————————————————

Quotation From The Full-Text Article

“Morphologically intact borrelia parts seen after 4 days of incubation with antibiotics, however, may also persist in humans during antibiotic treatment. …granules and encysted

B. burgdorferi should be investigated further in view of their long-term persistence in infected tissues and their contribution to the pathogenesis of Lyme borreliosis.” (p.1132)

Carl Tuttle

Website: New Hampshire Lyme Misdiagnosis

 

No More Western Blots for Lyme Diagnosis?

April 30, 2013

http://www.medscape.com/infectiousdiseases

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Apr 30 – Regardless of travel history, Lyme disease can be diagnosed with a two-tiered algorithm that employs a standard Lyme disease ELISA, followed by a newer-generation C6 peptide ELISA, a new study suggests.

With the newer approach, “there is no requirement for cumbersome immunoblots, including IgM Western blotting, a test that has not fared well in the real world,” said Dr. Robert Schoen from Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut in an editorial published with the study in Clinical Infectious Diseases. “Both steps in this algorithm, the initial standard ELISA and the C6 peptide ELISA, are already

commercially available. It may be time to incorporate this newer two-tiered algorithm in clinical practice.”

“This newer approach has been previously demonstrated to be more sensitive in early Lyme disease than conventional, CDC recommended testing and equally specific for all stages of the illness,” he added.

The new study focused in particular on the problem presented by patients in the U.S. who might have acquired Lyme borreliosis (LB) in Europe.

The data showed that standard two-tiered testing (ELISA followed by immunoblot) using assays developed for use in the US was “inferior” to European assays for evaluating LB acquired in Europe, as Dr. Schoen pointed out in his editorial.

“This result is not surprising,” he wrote, “since Lyme disease in North America is caused by a single borrelial species, B. burgdorferi sensu stricto (s.s.). European tests would be expected to have better predictive value than US tests for European acquired infection.”

The researchers, led by Dr. John Branda from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, analyzed the sensitivity of each assay using 64 serum samples from infected patients at a single European site (Ljubljana, Slovenia) with early or late disease manifestations. Specificity was measured using 100 sera from healthy subjects from a non-endemic area (New Zealand).

For detection of European-acquired infection, conventional two-tiered testing (ELISA followed by immunoblot) using US assays had an overall sensitivity of 52% and specificity of 100% compared with 81% (p=0.0007) and 99% (p=1.0) using analogous European tests, the investigators reported online April 16th.

But the sensitivity of a US C6 ELISA used as a standalone test was 88% overall – statistically comparable to that of conventional two-tiered testing using European tests (p=0.47) and was 100% specific.

Similarly, an alternative two-tiered algorithm using a standard ELISA followed by a C6 ELISA was comparably sensitive (84% overall) compared with conventional two-tiered testing using European assays (p=0.82) and specificity remained 100%.

So what’s the “take home” message? Dr. Schoen says the C6 ELISA, used as a standalone test or as the second test in a two-tiered algorithm following a standard US ELISA “can be recommended for the diagnosis of Lyme disease acquired in North America and Europe and probably elsewhere. But the C6 ELISA as part of the two-tiered algorithm is a better test than the standalone test, because it is more specific.”

Dr. Branda did not respond to request for comment by press time.

The study had no commercial funding. Three of the authors have submitted a patent application for a point-of-care serodiagnostic test based on the algorithm described in the report and have received compensation from Alere Inc for collection and characterization of serum samples from patients with Lyme disease. Dr. Schoen has no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: http://bit.ly/15WMFgA and http://bit.ly/15WMFgA

Clin Infec Dis 2013.

Carl Tuttle

Seeking legal action to remove the misleading Lyme Disease and the Heart (Copyright © 2013, Wolters Kluwer Health) manuscript written by Krause and Bockenstedt. A manuscript impacting patient outcomes which could lead to delayed diagnosis, treatment and disability. Letter to the editor submission to Circulation

S—– Forwarded Message —–

From: Carl Tuttle <runagain@comcast.net>

Cc: kbarry@circulationjournal.org, jackman@circulationjournal.org, richard blumenthal <richard_blumenthal@blumenthal.senate.gov>, Daniel Pollock <Daniel_Pollock@blumenthal.senate.gov>, press@blumenthal.senate.gov, Bethany Lesser <Bethany_Lesser@gillibrand.senate.gov>, info@wolterskluwer.com, Robert Becker <Robert.Becker@wolterskluwer.com>, Katelyn Kelly <Katelyn.Kelly@mahouse.gov>

To: circ@circulationjournal.org

Sent: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:22:14 -0000 (UTC)

Subject: Letter to the editor submission to Circulation

April 22, 2013

Circulation

560 Harrison Avenue, Ste. 502

Boston, MA. 02118

Joseph A. Vita, MD

Editor, Correspondence Section

Dear Dr Vita,

Thank you for following up with my letter to the editor submission to Circulation. On behalf of the disabled Lyme patients in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, New Hampshire and across the nation I regret to inform you that we will be seeking legal action to remove the misleading Lyme Disease and the Heart (Copyright © 2013, Wolters Kluwer Health) manuscript written by Krause and Bockenstedt. A manuscript impacting patient outcomes which could lead to delayed diagnosis, treatment and disability.

Your Circulation Journal has a worldwide reach influencing clinicians around the globe so ignoring the discrepancies identified and the references I have provided leaves countless patients at risk.  As I have stated in the attached letter addressed to Managing Editor Karen Barry, the Lyme Disease and the Heart manuscript should be retracted, corrected or removed altogether.

The Circulation Journal has a responsibility to its readers to provide accurate and current information from authors qualified in the respective field for which they are publishing.

Neither of the authors sees patients as a cardiac credentialed physician. Bockenstedt is a rheumatologist who has published her research on murine models of laboratory induced Lyme arthritis in inbred mice with immune deficiency and has no credentials in clinical cardiology by virtue of residency training or daily practice experience. Krause has made substantial contributions to our knowledge of Babesiosis and might I remind you, board member of the American Lyme Disease Foundation. Neither reads and signs out electrocardiograms. It is an affront to the reader to be “Instructed” on Cardiac developments which were all worked out in the 1980’s. Is there any discussion of: Dilated cardiomyopathy?, Orthotopic Heart Transplant for LB cardiac disease, pericarditis, endocarditis due to Bb or persistent heart failure do to LB in the heart and pancarditis causing death secondary to Bb infection? Omitting these presentations of the disease entirely misleads the reader to believe that Lyme is little more than a nuisance disease.

Original letter to the editor follows with copy of this correspondence forwarded to Senator Richard Blumenthal and Massachusetts Representative David Linsky who sponsored the Massachusetts Lyme Disease Commission Report.

Sincerely,

Carl Tuttle

—- Forwarded Message —–

From: circ@circulationjournal.org

To: runagain@comcast.net

Sent: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 20:38:41 -0000 (UTC)

Subject: CIRCULATIONAHA/2013/002399 Decision – Letter to the Editor

April 18, 2013

Mr. Carl Tuttle

RE: CIRCULATIONAHA/2013/002399

Letter to the Editor

Dear Mr. Tuttle,

Thank you for your submission to Circulation. We deeply appreciate your interest in the journal and its content. Unfortunately, we cannot accept your Letter to the Editor for publication in the journal.

We know that you will be disappointed by our decision. Unfortunately, due to space limitations, we can accept only small percentage of the letters we receive. As a result, we must reject some letters, like yours, that would otherwise qualify for publication.

Again, thank you very much for your submission. We hope that you will consider submitting material to us in the future.

Sincerely yours,

Joseph A. Vita, MD

Editor, Correspondence Section

Joseph Loscalzo, MD, PhD

Editor-in-Chief