Tag Archives: CDC

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

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

 

U.S. healthcare providers’ experience with Lyme and other tick-borne diseases

Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH 03051Letter to the Editor, The Lancet Infectious Diseases Published May 2012
U.S. healthcare providers’ experience with Lyme and other tick-borne diseases

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877959X14000429

Meghan E. Brett, Alison F. Hinckley, Emily C. Zielinski-Gutierrez, Paul S. Mead

Division of Vector-Borne Diseases,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
Fort Collins, CO, USA
Attn: Alison F. Hinckley, Corresponding author

Dear Alison F. Hinckley,

In reference to the abstract listed in the subject line of this email; “four questions” about tick-borne diseases added to the 2009 Docstyles survey, I would like to call attention to question number two below.
1. Diseases encountered
2. Management of patients with early Lyme disease
3. Provision of tick-bite prophylaxis
4. Sources of information on tick-borne diseases

For some unknown rationale the CDC appears to be fixated on the acute or early stages of Lyme disease. Is this the only stage of the disease that the CDC believes physicians routinely encounter?
Please refer to the following study:

Comparison of Lyme Disease Prevalence and Disease Reporting in an Endemic Area
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.
With that set of data most Lyme patients miss the narrow window of opportunity to treat the early stages of the disease. What questions have you asked the 2000 healthcare providers in the Docstyles Survey regarding disseminated or late stage Lyme disease?

There is absolutely no medical training whatsoever for the later stages of this disease so patients are often ping ponged though the medical community for years or decades before obtaining a late stage Lyme diagnosis usually ending in disability.

The CDC recently reported three cases of sudden cardiac death due to Lyme Carditis:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6249a1.htm
Three seemingly healthy young patients dropped dead of heart failure and no one suspected an infection until a pathologist readying heart tissue for a possible transplant noticed something wrong. 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. None of the patients had evidence or a known history of erythema migrans (bulls-eye) rash. Our blood supply is not screened for Lyme disease so you have to ask the question, “How many seemingly healthy blood donors are carrying Lyme disease?

Late stage Lyme disease is an epidemic here in New Hampshire with a medical community practicing willful ignorance as it has become blatantly obvious that the CDC is only concerned with the acute stage of the infection while turning a blind eye to the more serious and life threatening stages of Lyme disease.

Respectfully submitted,

Carl Tuttle

Hudson, NH 03051