waking up the nation, one reader at a time · 2020. 4. 2. · waking up the nation, ... someone...

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT

Waking Up the Nation,One Reader at a Time...

Public Health Alert www.publichealthalert.org

Biological Warfare Experiment on American Citizens Results in Spreading Pandemic

CDC-Created Epidemic Now Spreading Down East Coast of U.S.

Doctors Prevented from Treating Patients by Biowarfare Arm of the CDC (EpidemicIntelligence Service) Working with the IDSA in Phase II of the CDC's Infamous

Tuskegee Experiment

by Jerry Leonard

"Who could imagine thegovernment, all the way upto the Surgeon General ofthe United States, deliber-ately allowing a group of itscitizens to die from a terri-ble disease for the sake ofan ill-conceived experi-ment?"

--Commentary on theTuskegee Experiment

"How tragic would be the

irony if an agency estab-lished to control and findcures for diseases causedinstead their proliferation."

Comment on Plum Island'sBiologicalWarfare Research,

quoted in Lab 257

"A much more discreet, dia-bolical and effective methodof disabling a country wouldbe to employ a moderatelyinfectious organism, or com-bination of organisms(Russian Doll Cocktail),which would pass slowlythrough the populationunnoticed."

- Marjorie Tietjen, Lymeresearcher

Americans are underattack from an insidious bio-logical warfare agent perpe-trated by agencies within ourown government. This attackis centered on the AmericanEast Coast, but nobodyshould feel safe.

Shockingly, I amtalking about Lyme disease1,

an affliction that the unin-formed may believe is noth-ing more than arthritiscaused by a tick bite. Butaccording to the CDC, this"multisystem, multistage" ill-ness is capable of inducingdisorders2 including "chronicinflammatory arthritis,chronic muscle pain, heartdisease and/or neurological(brain and peripheral nerves)disorders." So many dis-abling afflictions are causedby Lyme that it has earnedthe disease the nickname"The Great Imitator.3"

The highly complexbacterium that causes Lymedisease4 has the ability toinfect nearly every organ inthe body, often in spite ofantibiotic administration, bychanging into various self-protective forms5. This oftenhappens without initiallybeing detected by the vic-tims themselves or by thewoefully inadequate,indirect6 diagnostic tests7,8.

These attributes ofLyme disease have inspired

researchers to call it a "pleo-morphic stealth pathogen."And with the exception ofthe American Northeast,ground-zero for the out-break, a crippling national(and worldwide) epidemichas largely spread "underthe radar9."

In this article Idescribe exactly how andwhy the CDC has allowedthis catastrophic epidemicto spread on behalf of thepharmaceuticals industryusing an orchestrated disin-formation campaign led byCDC-manufactured"thought-leaders". Thiscriminal program hasenabled large-scale humanexperimentation (theTuskegee Experiment, PhaseII) under the cover ofbiowarfare research toimplement a step-by-stepvaccine marketing agendaoutlined in a cold-bloodedCDC marketing strategy pub-lished in 1999.

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT

www.publichealthalert.org Public Health Alert

"…we are dealing here witha formidable 'smart stealth'type of bacteria that is hardto eradicate-one that doesextreme damage to psycheand soma if not treatedaggressively over the longterm when missed in thefirst days following inocula-tion by the vector..."

-- Dr. Virginia Scherr

Lyme disease isspreading rapidly up anddown the East Coast of theUS. In fact, it is the mostcommon tick-borne diseasein the Northern Hemisphereaccounting for more than95% of all vector-borne dis-eases reported in the UnitedStates. Even worse, the verysame Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention thatinvestigated the disease andits myriad induced disordersis home to a secretivebiowarfare defense infra-structure that prevents peo-ple not only from under-standing the devastatingnature of the disease (due toits complexity and oftennonspecific symptoms), butalso from getting treatmentfor it.

Many thousands ofLyme patients who are des-perately ill cannot get a doc-tor to diagnose them proper-ly, let alone treat them-evenin admitted endemic areas.In some cases this is becauseof pure ignorance, where adoctor diagnoses arthritis orheart trouble without discov-ering that the underlyingcause is really Lyme, whichthen goes untreated. In egre-gious cases, knowledgeabledoctors won't admit that thepatient has Lyme despite allthe signs, and they refuse to

treat it. In outrageous cases,knowledgeable doctors real-ize that the patient hasLyme, but they aren'tallowed to treat it or theyare punished if they do.

What is behind thistravesty10?

"It seems everywhere I go,someone comes up to me totalk about how Lyme dis-ease has severely impactedtheir lives or someone theyknow."

--Congressman Chris Smith(R-NJ), 2011

The Curious Lyme-Biowarfare Connections

In a previous article,I related that Lyme disease isnamed for the unfortunatetown in Connecticut where itfirst broke out, just 20 milesfrom the nation's top-levelbiowarfare test facility (PlumIsland Animal DiseaseResearch Center) that con-ducted outdoor tick experi-ments and has a history ofpathogen-leaks from itsinternal labs.

The connectionsbetween Lyme diseaseresearch and biowarfare arestunning11. A quick review:

The bacterium thatcauses the disease is namedafter a biowarfare researcherwho, decades previous in abiowarfare lab, injectedIxodid ticks-the same type ofticks that spread Lyme, withBorrelia bacteria-the sametype of bacteria that causesLyme disease12. The firstresearcher to overcome thedifficult process of culturingthe Lyme bacterium workedin this same biowarfare lab

and now directs his ownbiowarfare lab. The defense-contractor researcher who"discovered" the Ixodid tickvector that causes Lyme dis-ease, and led the earlyefforts to deny victims treat-ment for it (under numer-ous, fraudulent pretexts),was then a recent graduateof the CDC's biowarfaredefense program. Theresearcher whose publica-tion is universally used toinstitutionalize this treat-ment-denial philosophy forLyme disease was also agraduate of this CDC biode-fense program and now alsodirects his own biowarfarelab.

Moreover, the leadauthor of the highly contro-versial treatment guidelinesfor Lyme disease, which usethis publication as a justifica-tion13, travels around thecountry lecturing on biologi-cal warfare treatments14.Press releases prepared in2005 to announce the open-ing of a government-fundedbiowarfare lab at theUniversity of Texas admittedLyme disease was one of thenumerous bioweapons to bestudied at the facility, thenwere mysteriously edited toscrub only the references toLyme disease15.

Are you getting the picture?

"As of 2007, not a singleU.S. government researcherhad been prosecuted forhuman experimentation,and many of the victims ofU.S. government experi-ments have not receivedcompensation, or in manycases, acknowledgment ofwhat was done to them."

-Wikipedia.org (Unethicalhuman experimentation in

the United States16)

The Tuskegee ExperimentContinues

My research into thehorrific politics behind Lymedisease have led me tobelieve that the LymeEpidemic is the result ofPhase II of the CDC's infa-mous Tuskegee Experiment,only this time conductedunder the protection ofbiowarfare research. (This iscovered in my July 2011 arti-cle in the Public HealthAlert17. )

The originalTuskegee Experiment wasdesigned to monitor thedestruction that syphiliswould cause over the longterm in untreated controls sothat treatments and preven-tive strategies could be test-ed. Thus, in Phase I of thisexperiment, geographicallyisolated black men and theirfamilies were systematicallydenied treatment againstsyphilis for decades, so thatthe "natural course" of thedisease and its spread couldbe monitored through thepatients' deaths and subse-quent dissections in carefullyarranged post-mortemexaminations18. Even thoughthe experiment was provingfatal almost immediately19,the deadly experimentwould go on for decades20.

I believe Phase II ofthis deadly experiment isbeing conducted by the CDCwith a weaponized variant ofa Borrelia spirochete-a bac-terium of the same phylumas the syphilis spirochetethat was the subject of the

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT


first Tuskegee Experiment.(The Lyme spirochete is actu-ally much more complexthan the syphilis spirocheteand the infection more dead-ly and less understood21.)

You need to armyourself with information toprotect yourself and yourfamily. As will be shownbelow, the CDC clearly isn'tgoing to do it22. "Lyme disease patients fre-quently endure extensivedelays in obtaining an initialdiagnosis, have poor accessto healthcare and suffer asevere burden of illness."

-- Johnson, Aylward &Stricker,

(Health Policy, 2011)

No One Is SafeLyme disease spares

no level of society23. GeorgeW. Bush caught it while serv-ing as president24. Lyme alsohas afflicted Senator CharlesSchumer of New York25.They may have been sparedthe awful effects of misdiag-nosis and denial of treat-ment because of their privi-leged positions, but millionsof others haven't been solucky26.

In addition to crip-pling arthritis, this diseasecan cause severe and dis-abling neuro-cognitive symp-toms that are difficult if notimpossible to cure (depend-ing on delays in diagnosisand treatment)-making it agrave national securitythreat, especially when itinfects the Commander InChief in time of war27.

But the biology ofthe Lyme infection is onlypart of the problem. Anotheraspect of the epidemic is themanner in which it is being

politically perpetuatedthrough the denial of theseverity and geographicalextent of the disease by theCDC and associated govern-ment agencies. This hasresulted in many thousandsof desperately ill patientsbeing cruelly and systemati-cally denied medical atten-tion as they fall victim to thenumerous symptoms of thedisease.

The Tuskegee ExperimentWas Worse Than We Thought

Even as the CDC'sagents work to preventAmericans from gettingtreatment for this plague, wehave recently learned thatthe CDC's infamous TuskegeeExperiment in treatment-prevention against an eerilysimilar bacterium(Treponema Pallidum) wasfar wider in scope and moredeadly than we have beenled to believe.

Indeed, instead ofthe experiment being limitedto the prevention of treat-ment for syphilis in an isolat-ed geographical area ofAlabama, we have learnedthat the TuskegeeExperiment was internation-al in scope and involved thedeliberate infection of men-tal patients and prisonersthrough syphilis injections,scrapings and orchestratedexposure to carefully infect-ed prostitutes.

Professor SusanReverby28 recently summa-rized:

"In this research program ofa series of carefully delineat-ed experiments, PHS doctors

exposed their subjectsthrough the use of infectiousprostitutes or directlythrough inoculums madefrom tissue from human andanimal syphilitic gummasand chancres, or pus of gon-orrhea or chancroid filledsores."

Dr. John C. Cutler, anassistant surgeon general inthe Public Health Servicewho conducted these experi-ments in Guatemala with thesyphilis spirochete, ultimate-ly returned to the U.S. toconduct similar experimentsin prisons29.

"If this were fiction, thestudy's investigators wouldhave been the archetypalmad scientists. But the studywas conducted by no lessprestigious a group than theUnited States Public HealthService30 and funded by theNational Institutes of Health(NIH)…"

--The Lancet, December2011 (commentary on inter-

national syphilis injectionexperiments conducted by

the U.S.)

As Reverby relates,these experiments withsyphilis spirochetes wereconducted by the PublicHealth Service to test vac-cine prototypes:

"These prison stud-ies were done to answersome questions about rein-fection and whether havingtreated syphilis and thenbeing provided with the"booster" of new diseasecreated immunity to furtherinfection."

In response to thesehorrifying revelations,

Francis Collins, the NIH direc-tor, tried to allay fears onongoing experimentation:

"I want to empha-size that today, the regula-tions that govern researchfunded by the United StatesGovernment, whether con-ducted domestically or inter-nationally, would absolutelyprohibit this type of study31."

While such state-ments may offer comfort tothe uninformed, I believe theNIH and the CDC are in factconducting a modernTuskegee Experiment intreatment denial for vaccineresearch against anotherspirochete disease that isvery similar to syphilis.

I have referred tothis ongoing medical crimeas the institutionalization ofthe Tuskegee Experiment32.The treatment denial experi-ment is being orchestratedon a daily basis on a grandscale in a sophisticated man-ner at a very high levelthrough the enforcement oftreatment guidelines33 andthe selective NIH funding ofguideline authors' research.(This body of sponsoredresearch gives the treatmentguidelines undeserved credi-bility through an artificiallycontrived appearance of sci-entific consensus by manu-factured thought-leaders34.)

Through the increas-ing reliance on treatmentguidelines, which often endup being "non-treatment"guidelines, the medical sys-tem can be used not only toconduct unethical experi-ments but also to wage bio-logical warfare against anentire population throughtreatment denial. Indeed, itis not far-fetched to call this


SPECIAL REPORTthe "institutionalization ofbiological warfare35."

As was the case withthe original syphilis study intreatment denial, the NIH isso intimately intertwinedwith the immoral researchthat it is impossible for themto conduct an impartialinvestigation into it36. Thus,we need an informed publicto demand a truly independ-ent investigation into whymany thousands of patientsare being denied treatmentfor Lyme disease.

The Tuskegee-Lyme Link?One of America's

leading Lyme and biowarfareresearchers, Dr. AlanBarbour37 has written on theexperimental use of bacterialdisease agents known as"Borrelia" (the type of organ-ism which causes Lyme dis-ease) in syphilis treatmentresearch.

Barbour has summa-rized bizarre studies in whichBorrelia infections wereinduced in mice for subse-quent inoculation back intohumans, so the organismscould be studied as potentialcures for syphilis (throughdeliberate fever-induction, or"pyrotherapy"):

"When using borreli-ae for pyrotherapy of neu-rosyphilis, the authors of thisreport recommended thatno more than 30 to 40 pas-sages in mice be madebefore inoculation of thestrain back into humans38."

Was this ongoingexperimentation with delib-erate human infection withlive Borrelia spirochetes partof the ongoing Tuskegeestudy involving deliberate

human infection with syphilisspirochetes39, so that vac-cines and cures could betested40 in carefully con-trolled populations (somecontrol populations gettingno treatments)?

Let us establishquickly that Lyme diseaseand syphilis are similarorganisms. Porcella andSchwan wrote in the JournalOf Clinical Investigation:

"… the Lyme diseasespirochete, Borrelia burgdor-feri, is amazingly similar tothe spirochete, Treponemapallidum, that causessyphilis41."

The infectionscaused by the two diseaseagents are also similar. Assummarized by JudithMiklossy:

"Both spirochetesare neurotropic and in bothdiseases the neurologicaland pathological manifesta-tions occur in three stages.They both can persist in theinfected host tissue and playa role in chronic neuropsy-chiatric disorders, includingdementia42."

Military researcherswere investigating the use ofBorrelia spirochetes insyphilis vaccine researchbecause the infectiousagents were so similar (pro-viding hope for commonantigens that could be usedin vaccines and diagnostictests43), as were the infec-tions they caused.

But there was moreat stake than potential curesor tests for syphilis.

Barbour has alsonoted that Borrelia spiro-chetes were not only usefulfor studies in syphilis experi-ments. They were of "basic

biological interest44" as wellas a useful model for provid-ing unique insight into thehuman immune response45,a topic vital to vaccineresearch, in general. Thus,human experimentation withBorrelia bacteria would havemajor research benefits out-side of syphilis research.

Notably, Barbour is acareer biowarfare researcher,as are many of the so-called"experts" on the Borreliaorganism that causes Lymedisease.

Borrelia and BiowarfareThe tie-in between

Lyme disease, syphilis andbiowarfare research mayseem puzzling (see AppendixA for a summary of theseconnections). But there is aconnection that makes per-fect sense if you think aboutit.

The TuskegeeExperiment conducted fromthe 1920s to the 1970s bythe PHS/CDC (a quasi-mili-tary institution formed dur-ing World War II46 andinvolved in biological warfareactivities47) also had a mili-tary justification. The rates ofsyphilis infection in the pub-lic were hindering theAmerican war effort as farback as World War I48. Thus,efforts aimed at curing orpreventing syphilis had anational security justifica-tion.

The degree to whichBorrelia infections such asLyme disease affects thereadiness status of Americantroops is an ongoing area ofgovernment study49.(American soldiers wereeven infected with relapsing

fever Borrelia through injec-tions and tick bites in inter-national experiments tounderstand the transmissionof Borrelia diseases.50) Butthe truth has been activelyobscured from the public'sview, much like the extent ofthe national epidemic and itspremeditated nature.

"Three human beings, vol-unteer patients, have beeninfected with relapsing feveras follows:

1. The first by a subcuta-neous injection of bloodfrom a white rat which hadbeen infected with relapsingfever by …naturally infectedticks.

2. The second by a hypoder-matic injection of a suspen-sion of naturally infectedticks.

3. The third by being bittenby naturally infected ticks."

-- Bates, et. al., Am. J. Trop.Med.

In addition to affect-ing military readiness,research into disablingagents such as the Borreliaorganism that causes Lymedisease had an offensive useas biowarfare agents.

Borrelia organismswere of interest to the mili-tary because of their abilityto cause both mentally andphysically disabling infec-tions that were capable ofrelapsing, even after treat-ment with antibiotics. Thiswas due to the organism'sability to not only rapidlyevolve into different forms ina manner that frustrated


PUBLIC HEALTH ALERTantibiotics administration51,but also to rapidly dissemi-nate throughout every majororgan in the body.

Another form ofself-protection is the organ-ism's ability to form protec-tive "biofilms" and "cysts52"when confronted with a hos-tile environment, only toreconvert from dormancy toactive infection once afriendly environment wasagain encountered53 (forexample, when any adminis-tered antibiotics were gone54). This protective dormancycapability, which is shared byanthrax (a biowarfare agentalso studied by Barbourbefore Lyme broke out55) andsyphilis, would be highly use-ful for real-world biowarfareexercises56.

In addition toweapons that could killquickly, the Pentagon wasinterested in such weaponsthat could incapacitate57.

The staggering ben-efits of Lyme disease as anincapacitating infection weresummarized by researcherMark Sanborne:

"Lyme's ability toevade detection on routinemedical tests, its myriad pre-sentations which can baffledoctors by mimicking 100different diseases, its amaz-ing abilities to evade theimmune system and antibi-otic treatment, would makeit an attractive choice tobioweaponeers looking foran incapacitating agent.Lyme's abilities as 'the greatimitator' might mean that anattack could be misinterpret-ed as simply a rise in theincidence of different, natu-rally occurring diseases suchas autism, MS, lupus and

chronic fatigue syndrome(ME). Borrelia's inherentability to swap outer surfaceproteins, which may alsovary widely from strain tostrain, would make the pro-duction of an effective vac-cine extremely difficult. ...Finally, the delay before theappearance of the most inca-pacitating symptoms wouldallow plenty of time for anattacker to move away fromthe scene, as well as pre-venting people in a contami-nated zone from realisingthey had been infected andseeking treatment58."

Lyme and Syphilis: A Shared"Tuskegee Research"Rationale

The rationale of thePHS/CDC's Tuskegee syphilisexperiment in denying treat-ment to individuals "to eval-uate the effectiveness ofprograms of public healthcontrol" was explained inone journal from the begin-ning phases of the epidemic:

"… the facts relativeto the occurrence of centralnervous system syphilis, car-diovascular syphilis and con-genital syphilis were wellknown from the point ofview of diagnosis and patho-logical findings once the dis-ease had become manifest.However, there was no accu-rate idea about the naturalhistory of the disease lead-ing-up to these complica-tions. This information wasnecessary in order to evalu-ate the effectiveness of pro-grams of public health con-trol with a reasonabledegree of understanding ofthe natural history of the dis-ease59."

The CDC was able togarner information about"the natural history of thedisease" from its earliestphases by monitoring isolat-ed communities of Americancitizens denied treatment forsyphilis "from the beginningof the disease to the deathof the infected person." Thiswas viewed as an "opportu-nity … to compare thesyphilitic process uninflu-enced by modern treat-ment60."

Shockingly, theexperiments were publishedin open medical literatureover the years61 and yet thestory did not break until1972, when long overduebad publicity forced theexperiment to end62.

Is the ongoing effortbehind treatment denial ofLyme disease allowing thegovernment to conductanother long-term experi-ment on the public with ahidden agenda of biologicalwarfare?63 One which allowsthem to monitor the variouschronic symptoms caused bysuch disabling agents in anuntreated public, while gen-erating a demand for vaccineresearch against them? If so,how much bad publicity willbe required to shut thismulti-decade experimentdown?

"So far, we are keeping theknown positive patientsfrom getting treatment."64

--Comment On TuskegeeExperiment,

by U.S. Public Health ServiceOfficial

"Half of the [Lyme diseasevictim] respondents report-ed seeing at least seven

physicians before the diag-nosis of Lyme disease wasmade. Nearly half had Lymedisease for more than 10years and traveled over 50miles to obtain treatment."

--2011 Medical SurveyPublished by the California

Lyme Disease Association

A Contrived EpidemicProliferating Out of Control

Lyme disease is themost rapidly expanding vec-tored disease in the U.S. 65

Nationally reported cases ofLyme disease doubled from1991 to 200766. An estimat-ed 2,000 to 20,000 peopleper year contract Lyme. Andeven the higher number like-ly understates the number ofcases.

Local levels aremore alarming. On LongIsland, next door to the PlumIsland Animal DiseaseResearch Center that con-ducted outdoor tick experi-ments, the "rate of infectionamong the constructionworkers who worked out-doors" is an incredible 13%.67

The Boston Globehas summarized the spreadof the disease northwardfrom the NewYork/Connecticut "groundzero" area to Massachusetts:

"The number ofLyme disease cases reportedin Massachusetts jumped byabout 50 percent from 2004to 2005, a single-yearincrease that prompted con-cerned state health officialsto say they were stepping upefforts to educate the publicabout prevention of the dis-ease."68

Moving south fromthe Connecticut epicenter ofthe epidemic, Pennsylvania

SPECIAL REPORT


now leads the nation in thenumber of Lyme cases. Morealarmingly:

"In the past fiveyears the cases have dou-bled, and the populationmost at risk is kids, ages 5 to10 and the over-40-year-oldswho are in their backyardsgardening."69

Moving furthersouth, in a major investiga-tive reporting series, theRoanoke Times has just con-firmed that the LymeEpidemic is spreading downthe East Coast to Virginia andNorth Carolina, and even toFlorida.

The rapid increase inLyme in Virginia (500% insome areas!) was reportedby the Times:

"Lyme disease inVirginia is spreading westand south ... In MontgomeryCounty, the number ofreported cases jumped 500percent from four in 2007 to24 in 2008. [A] record 65new cases have been docu-mented this year in theRoanoke region -- whereonly a handful was reportedjust four years ago."

In fact, the rate ofthe epidemic's spread is like-ly worse than what Virginiaofficials belatedly acknowl-edge. Dr. Keri Hall, directorof epidemiology at theVirginia Department ofHealth, cautioned: "it is high-ly likely that the state does-n't know about all instancesof the tick-borne disease." 70

To address the esca-lating epidemic in Virginia,Gov. Bob McDonnell enteredthe fray, creating a LymeDisease Task Force to aid thediagnosis, treatment andeducation among doctors

and the public at large.When the task force issuedits recommendations, thechair, Michael Farris (eightout of ten of his family mem-bers have Lyme), stated, "Ithink it's the greatest healththreat of our time."71

Why has this notbeen done at the nationallevel72? Tragically, becauseof the "political" environ-ment created by the CDC,patients and doctors cannotrely on the CDC or thenational medical infrastruc-ture to get accurate informa-tion on how to treat Lymedisease. In fact, a systematicdisinformation campaign,and a war on doctors andpatients who see through it,is being waged by agentsand agencies of the CDC.This "controlled stand-down"of the CDC seriously inhibitsdoctors' ability to get assis-tance in treating victims atthe state level.

Here is a case in point.While volunteering

at Virginia summer camp lastyear, Dr. Cathryn Harbor sawan astounding 10% of hercampers come down withsymptoms of Lyme disease,according to the RoanokeTimes.73

Dr. Harbor wasunable to get cooperationfrom her state Departmentof Health, which dismissedher concern with contrivedand deadly arrogance thathas become typical of theso-called health experts whoshould be confronting theLyme Epidemic, instead ofactively denying it.

The CDC, workingthrough the InfectiousDiseases Society of America

(IDSA), has created a hostilepolitical climate for stateDepartments of Health74 likeVirginia's. This adversarial cli-mate prevents Lyme victimsfrom even being acknowl-edged, let alone treated. Theeffects of this climate on Dr.Harbor's attempt to treat thechildren were relayed by theRoanoke Times:

"It's so politicallycontentious that when shecalled the VirginiaDepartment of Health to sayshe was swamped treatingcampers with acute Lyme,the response was: You can'tpossibly have that manycases because the number ofLyme-carrying ticks inWestern Virginia is insignifi-cant and small."

"You can't haveLyme because the expertssay it doesn't exist here."This is the devastating "partyline" of circular reasoningthat has been parroted thelast 40 years because of stag-gering levels of disinforma-tion put out by the CDC andits biodefense unit, the EIS(Epidemic IntelligenceService). This militant denial-ism is deadly for victims of adisease for which treatmentdelay by days or weeks canmake the differencebetween getting well or fac-ing a lifetime of suffering.75

"As I have traveled through-out my congressional dis-trict, I have been struck bythe lack of knowledge aboutLyme by both patients andmedical providers, eventhough this area has longbeen at the center of aLyme epidemic." --Congressman Frank Wolf (R,VA).

A similar state ofaffairs existed in the neigh-boring state of NorthCarolina. State healthexperts there have engagedin denials over the yearsabout the prevalence, andeven the existence, of Lymedisease. These deadlydenials have recently beenexposed as fraudulent by theRaleigh NewsObserver.Reports the Observer:

"After years of cau-tioning that people wereunlikely to get Lyme diseasein North Carolina, statehealth leaders are nowadvising that the tick-borneillness can, in fact, beacquired here."76

Too bad for those inNorth Carolina unfortunateenough to have contractedLyme when the official posi-tion was that it didn't exist!(Whose experts werethose?)

The calculateddenial of infection ratesdirectly impacts the abilityof patients to get diagnosedand treated. This reality inNorth Carolina was summa-rized by the RaleighNewsObserver:

"Yet North Carolinahealth officials do not con-sider Lyme disease a perpet-ual threat -- a designationthat would make it easier fordoctors to diagnose Lymebased solely on a patient'ssymptoms ..."

Consequently, "foryears patients insisted theyhad caught Lyme from tickbites in North Carolina andfaced tremendous problemsfinding doctors to diagnoseand treat them."

The Raleigh NewsObserver relates the case of

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT


Angela Stott and her effortsto get her son diagnosed andtreated for Lyme disease(similar cases are common-place):

"This past summer,Angela Stott of Asheville saidher son, Max, went severalweeks without a diagnosisbefore he became so sick hecould barely walk and hadsuch excruciating headacheshis eyes crossed.

"More than onedoctor told her Lyme diseasewas not a factor in NorthCarolina. Even when a Lymetest came back positive,Stott said, doctors still ques-tioned the diagnosis.

"It was nightmar-ish," she said."

The newspapernotes how "the state is nowworking to get the word todoctors, who for years werereluctant to even testpatients for Lyme because itwasn't considered much of apossibility."

The Lyme Epidemicis also surging further south,in Florida. According to arecent article in the TampaTribune:

"Across Florida,Lyme disease cases havemore than tripled since2007, according to theFlorida Department ofHealth's Office of Statisticsand Assessments…"

Lyme disease caseshave also tripled in states farfrom the East Coast, likeIowa.78

"So using the CDC's owndefinition, physicians inGeorgia and Missourireported that they wereseeing Lyme disease. Butbecause the cases were in a

non-endemic area, the CDCtossed out these purely clin-ical diagnoses."

-Jonathan Edlow, Bull's-Eye

Even more alarming,the Times reports that"experts concede that inci-dence of Lyme is woefullyunder-reported and can beas much as 10 times higherthan the numbers indicate."79

The magnitude ofthe epidemic at the nationallevel has been summarizedin one article as follows:

"We're in the midstof a terrifying epidemic,although you wouldn't knowit to talk to most doctors andhealth specialists. The dis-ease is growing at a ratefaster than AIDS. From 2006to 2008 alone, the numberof cases jumped a whopping77 percent. …If any otherdisease had stricken so manypeople, the medical commu-nity would be scurrying forknowledge, scrambling forcures or rushing to warnpatients (think swine flu).But that's not the case withLyme disease -- a diseasecarried by ticks."80

"Our practice is restricted byhigher authorities, like theCDC."

--Dr. Muddasar Chaudr

Lyme Doctors EradicatedAlthough Lyme dis-

ease cases have doubled inthe past five years, the num-ber of doctors willing totreat them has dwindled.Medpage today reports thatat ground-zero of the LymeEpidemic, only 2% of doc-

tors in the state ofConnecticut are willing totreat it:

"Only a very smallnumber of physicians inConnecticut -- the epicenterof Lyme disease -- diagnoseand treat patients with thecontroversial chronic form ofthis tick-borne infection, asurvey found. Among 285primary care physicians sur-veyed, only about 2% treatchronic Lyme disease…"81

As the authors ofthe award-winning Lyme dis-ease documentary UnderOur Skin recently reported intheir blog:

"So, withConnecticut Lyme cases sky-rocketing up 118% from2006 to 2008, and the statedesperately needing everyLyme specialist it can get,the children of Connecticutare the ones receiving apotential life sentence of suf-fering, if they acquire one ormore tick-borne diseases."82

The human conse-quences of this reality arehard to fathom for those notdirectly affected.

The Tampa Tribunerelated the story of DeloresClaesson83, and her struggleto get her daughter treatedfor misdiagnosed Lyme dis-ease:

"In all," she said,"we saw about 20 doctors."None thought of Lyme dis-ease. "This is normal." Claessonsaid. "They don't knowabout it. They don't knowthe signs and symptoms. …here in Florida, doctors don'tknow about it and don'tknow how to diagnose it.They don't know how totreat it."

Even more alarming,according to Claesson, thedoctors are willingly ignorantof the epidemic:

"I want my kidfixed," she said. "Doctorshere are like ostriches put-ting their heads in the sand.It's been 27 months of purehell," she said.

"We're lepers,"Claesson said. "We can't getany treatment. It's bankrupt-ed people."

Virginia StateDelegate Tom Rust, afterinvestigating the LymeEpidemic in his state, com-mented, "I have people com-ing to me saying their dogcan get better treatmentthan they can."

As ludicrous as thissounds, it is a tragic fact thatpeople are resorting to treat-ment by veterinarians. Thisphenomenon is not limitedto the US. The Bolton Newsin the United Kingdomreported that a "toddler whowas taken to hospital after atick burrowed under his skin,ended up being treated by avet." The child's father stat-ed, "Daniel got better servicethere than at the hospital."84

Why the failure totreat Lyme patients?

Dr. MuddasarChaudry of Virginia, was spe-cific in stating why he wasunable to treat patients withrequired long-term antibi-otics:

"Our practice isrestricted by higher authori-ties, like the CDC."85

Dr. Kenneth Liegner,an MD treating Lymepatients in Armonk, NewYork, goes even further:

"Physicians who

SPECIAL REPORT


have cared for persons withchronic Lyme disease havefaced harassment at a mini-mum and for some, theircareers have been ruined.Researchers who have seri-ously dedicated themselvesto the scientific study ofchronic Lyme disease inhumans and/or animals haveoften found themselvesattacked or marginalized. Topersist in their researcheswould have resulted in virtu-al career suicide and somehave been forced, by exigen-cies of survival, to leave thefield."

The film-makers forthe award-winning UnderOur Skin described the pun-ishment (supervised proba-tion and a $20,000 fine)meted out to Dr. Charles RayJones, a national hero knownfor successfully treatingthousands of desperately illchildren with Lyme diseasein the Northeast.

"Last week theConnecticut Medical Examining Board (CMEB)voted to discipline Dr.Charles Ray Jones, the 80-year-old pediatrician fea-tured in UNDER OUR SKIN,for technical violations in theway he diagnosed and treat-ed three children suspectedof having tick-borne dis-eases.''

The film-makersnoted the asymmetry in theestablishment's maliciouspunishment of a well-respected Lyme doctor:

"…Last year themedical board punished 43physicians for seriouscharges such as substanceabuse, sexual misconduct,mental illness, and negli-gence; not one of these

physicians received a finelarger than $5,000. And onlyone other physician, accusedof drug abuse, received alonger supervised probationperiod than Dr. Jones -though this drug-addict doc-tor did not receive the addi-tional $20,000 in fines leviedon Dr. Jones."

The film-makers alsowarned:

"The medicalboard's six-year investigationinto Dr. Jones has sent aheadline-grabbing messageto every pediatrician inConnecticut - If you treatchildren with Lyme diseasewith more than four weeksof antibiotics, you may loseyour medical license and betreated as a pariah amongyour peers.''87

According to attor-ney Richard Wolfram, thisharsh treatment of Lymedoctors88 has caused manyto refuse treatment withlong-term antibiotics, leavingpatients abandoned:

…in the case of long-term treatment of Lyme dis-ease, complainants estimatefewer than 150 physicians inthe United States are willingto endure the pressures fromthe IDSA and from insurancecompanies (by their refusalto cover long-term antibiotictreatment). This number isdown considerably from pre-vious levels."

Unfortunately, it isexactly this type of embat-tled long-term treatment89

that is often required to fightthe Lyme infection.90

"It is difficult enough forsomeone suffering debilitat-ing symptoms due to late-

stage Lyme disease to getwell with the judicious, butadequate, use of long-termantibiotics. Almost no onegets better without these.To deny patients access [to]this care is a travesty. Butthis happens all the timeand patients often travelhundreds to thousands ofmiles to see one of thesmall numbers of Lymeexperts in this country. Howcan that be?"

--Dr. Jon Sterngold

Observations ofpatients getting better underthe expert administration oflong-term antibiotics--only torelapse after their doctorsare prevented from provid-ing them--are routine in theLyme treatment community.For example, the NorthCarolina state medicalboards punished infectiousdisease expert Dr. JosephJemsek for prescribing long-term antibiotics to desper-ately ill Lyme victims.Consequently, many of hispatients (including myself)relapsed because they wereno longer able to get treat-ment from Jemsek or otherdoctors who were afraid ofsimilar prosecution by thestate medical mafia. As themother of one such patient,who was recovering his sightunder Jemsek's expert care,related:

"We've looked forother doctors, but nobodywill deal with it here becausethey're terrified by whathappened to Dr. Jemsek. Allwe want is for our son to beable to be home and getwell. Dr. Jemsek did that forus. He gave us back our son'slife." 92

Manufactured DoctorShortage Enables ModernTuskegee Experiment

Why would themedical establishmentactively prevent doctorsfrom effectively treatingLyme disease, and helpdestroy doctors who treat it?

I believe the CDC isconducting Phase II of itsTuskegee Experiment on anexpanded scale for the samereason it conducted Phase I-the development, testingand marketing of pharma-ceutical products to treatonly symptoms of the dis-ease. In fact, the treatmentdenial of the Phase ITuskegee Experiment hasbecome an everyday occur-rence for thousands of Lymepatients because the experi-ment has become institu-tionalized within the main-stream medical systemthrough the creation andenforcement of treatmentguidelines to justify treat-ment denial. For added pro-tection, the CDC is conduct-ing this experiment in long-term treatment denialthrough the biowarfareinfrastructure as a biode-fense exercise.

The medical litera-ture from the time of theoriginal TuskegeeExperiment explained theexperimental reasons forwhy patients with chronicdiseases like Lyme or syphilismust be prevented from get-ting treatment over a longperiod:

"The prolongednature of a chronic diseaseor a disease with a chronicstage, such as syphilis,necessitates long-term study

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT


of the natural history (orpathogenesis) of the diseasebefore the effectiveness ofprograms for the control ofthe disease can be evaluatedproperly."93

In other words, along-term baseline must beestablished as to how thechronic disease behaves inuntreated patients (the "nat-ural history of the disease"),so that the effectiveness oftreatments or vaccines canbe evaluated against thisbackground.

Since syphilis andLyme disease are caused bysimilar organisms and createsimilar multi-staged, chronicinfections, a similar experi-mental rationale would applyto studies of Lyme diseasetreatments and vaccines.

Could the CDC reallybe conducting Phase II ofthe original TuskegeeExperiment? And could thisexplain the politics behindthe non-treatment of theLyme Epidemic?

Dr. Colin Ross, theintrepid author whoobtained thousands of pagesof FOIA documents onunethical government exper-imentation on its citizens,noted that:

"The TuskeegeeSyphilis Study was eventuallyshut down in 1972 becauseof the efforts of an investiga-tive journalist. There is noevidence to suggest that thegovernment or the medicalprofession had any intentionof closing the study as of1972."

Ross also noted theprecedent that the firstTuskegee Experiment set:

"It establishes that alarge network of doctors and

organizations are willing toparticipate in, fund and con-done grossly unethical med-ical experimentation into the1970's."

The timing is curiousin that just as the originalTuskegee Experiment wasbeing wound down in the1970s, the Lyme disease epi-demic and a correspondingdenial of treatment for it by"experts" (often associatedwith the CDC) was rampingup. In the 1970s, numerouscongressional investigationsalso revealed that theAmerican public had beensubject to decades of humanexperiments with all mannerof incapacitating agentsthrough the CIA's MKULTRAproject. According to thecongressional reports, thegovernment had engaged in"extensive testing and exper-imentation" on unwittinghuman subjects "at all sociallevels, high and low, nativeAmericans and foreign."94

The CDC's Secret Police: TheEpidemic IntelligenceService

In the Lyme war, theestablishment is waging abattle of ignorance anddenial. Doctors in the fieldtrying to treat the relapsing,chronic infection due toLyme, and their desperatelysick and relapsing patients,have opinions that differdrastically from the researchselectively published by CDCand Ivy League "experts"who routinely deny thenotorious "persistence" ofso-called chronic Lyme dis-ease, even after aggressivetreatment.95 As noted by theRoanoke Times:

"There is a gapingdisconnect between scientif-ic research and the experi-ences of people on theground. Among the 420 NewEnglanders whom anthropol-ogist Macauda interviewedfor his 2007 dissertation onchronic Lyme, 80 percent ofthe interviewees believed inthe [chronic form of the] dis-ease."

This "gaping discon-nect" can be laid directly atthe feet of the Centers forDisease Control's elitebiowarfare defense unit, theEpidemic IntelligenceService, since their epidemi-ologists96 and researchers arethe ones downplaying thegeographical extent andrelapsing nature of the LymeEpidemic.97 And this down-playing of the infection-rateand chronic nature of thedisease directly results intreatment denial.98

The anonymity ofthe EIS belies its power toshape health policy frombehind the scenes. Indeed, itwould be hard to underesti-mate the power of the EIS incoordinating domestic healthpolicy. Their graduates popu-late top positions in thehealth infrastructure (includ-ing the media99). Accordingto the American Journal ofEpidemiology:

"The current CDCDirector (and two previousDirectors) and a DeputyDirector are graduates of theprogram, as are the directorsof 9 of the 11 major CDCorganizational units andmuch of the CDC leadershipthroughout the organization.Two alumni have served asSurgeon General of theUnited States.''

International newsarticles report patients whoare initially treated with dis-gust rather than with medi-cine by their nation's med-ical experts, only to get bet-ter when they traveled to acountry that gave themproper tests and long-termantibiotics treatments.100,101

The political powerand disinformation networkof the EIS would aid in coor-dinating treatment-denialpolicy on an internationalscale, as well. According tothe American Journal ofEpidemiology:

"Many EIS alumniare serving or have served inleadership roles for theWorld Health Organization,the Pan American HealthOrganization, the WorldBank, and other internation-al organizations and founda-tions."

"It's possible to see themodern history of Lyme as astring of events with an EISmember at every crucialnode."

-Elena Cook, "Lyme Is ABiowarfare Issue"

The overall reach ofthe EIS in coordinating an"information exchange"would be substantial, asnoted in the Journal:

"Although difficultto quantify, the networkingand camaraderie among EISgraduates continues tostrengthen the overall publichealth infrastructure by facil-itating information exchangeamong alumni located in keypublic health positionsthroughout the nation andworld."

Careful investigation

SPECIAL REPORT


supports the theory that theepidemic of ignorance andcorresponding lack of treat-ment has been perpetuatedby the CDC as part of PhaseII of the deadly TuskegeeExperiment.

"Never would I havedeemed it possible that agroup of medical peoplewould work so vigorouslyand with such maliceagainst a group of desper-ately ill people …. But, hereit is."

-Lyme victim/activist (requested anonymity for

fear of reprisal)

Even worse, Phase IIis being carried out by theCDC with the aid of its secre-tive biological warfare group.Where the Phase I experi-ment denied isolatedpatients from seeing non-CDC-approved doctors102,Phase II involves preventingdoctors from treatingpatients (or even providingan accurate diagnosis--recallthe Tuskegee diagnosis ofsyphilis as "bad blood"103)outside of CDC-approvedguidelines published by amedical society known asthe IDSA (Infectious DiseaseSociety of America), on aninternational basis.

The CDC's own his-tory of the TuskegeeExperiment describes howthe CDC worked with promi-nent medical societies togain support for the multi-decade experiment in med-ical malpractice:

"1969 CDC reaffirmsneed for study and gainslocal medical societies' sup-port (AMA and NMA chap-

ters officially support contin-uation of study)."

So the nationalagency that was supposedto be protecting the publicfrom a deadly disease wasactually in favor of letting itgo untreated for experimen-tal reasons and worked withprestigious medical societiesto that end!

Tuskegee Phase II isbeing conducted in a similarmanner, including the directassistance of prominentmedical societies throughIDSA treatment guidelines104

enforced by CDC insiders,who are regularly found tobe on the payroll of thepharmaceuticals and insur-ance industries--both ofwhich can profit enormous-ly105 ,106by not treating themany symptoms107caused bythe disease.

"One way drug companieshave marketed their prod-ucts is by funding the imple-mentation of guidelines…"

--Civil Action No.08

CA 11318 DPW

The CDC has usedthe non-specificity of Lymesymptoms (except for thosefortunate enough to mani-fest the Bull's Eye rash at theonset of infection108 ) as anexcuse to mislabel the dis-ease and thereby preventeffective diagnosis and treat-ment.109,110 As Dr. BrianFallon summarized:

"Incorrectly labelingthese patients as having afunctional illness, such asdepression, hypochondriasisor a somatization disorder,may result in a delay in theinitiation of antibiotic treat-

ment. Such delay may leadto further dissemination ofthe infection, and in somecases severe disability andpossibly chronic neurologicdamage."

The further dissemi-nation of symptoms is highlyprofitable for pharmaceuticalcompanies, while treatingthe root cause of the diseasewith off-patent antibiotics isnot.111

"Most blockbuster drugs gotthat way not by curing peo-ple but by treating chronicconditions … that canrequire a lifetime of pre-scription refills."

--Michael Gianturco,Fortune

The Steere Camp's War onLyme Patients

Even more alarmingthan CDC complicity inspreading the epidemic112 isthe overlap between govern-ment personnel in biowar-fare and regulatory agenciesand private medical soci-eties, universities and corpo-rations involved in fuelingthe epidemic.

Notably, the leadauthor of the controversialIDSA Lyme disease treatmentguidelines, pharmaceuticalsconsultant Dr. GaryWormser, in his spare timelectures as a biowarfareexpert.113

Pharmaceuticalsconsultant Allen Steere,influential researcher and co-author of the guidelines, is aCDC/EIS biowarfare officer.He also worked for the pri-vate Yale Corporation114 thatworked closely with thebiowarfare tick lab acrossthe Long Island Sound fromLyme, Connecticut, and

which also controlled the ini-tial response to the LymeEpidemic in the Northeast.115

It was Steere'slaughable ideology thatantibiotics were ineffectiveagainst Lyme disease thatwas used from day one todeny patients this treatment.

The geographicalclustering of the arthritiscases in the initial Lyme out-break116, along with seasonalcorrelation of the outbreaks(arthritis symptoms typicallyincreased in late summerand early fall), made it diffi-cult to ignore the likelihoodthat insects were spreadingthe disease. Judith Menschwas a Connecticut housewifewho, like Polly Murray, hadvoiced her concerns aboutthe spreading arthritis epi-demic to local health author-ities (and even the CDC). Shementioned to Steere the firsttime they met that she sus-pected ticks might be thesource of the disease.117 Aspart of the initial investiga-tion into the mysterious epi-demic, Yale sent out bul-letins to the local communitywarning residents to be onthe lookout for insects thatmight be spreading the dis-ease.

While Steere wasstill prescribing toxic levels of"aspirin therapy"118 forMurray's desperately ill fami-ly, a man named Joe Dowhanwalked into Steere's officeand presented him with the"smoking gun." Dowhan hadnot only been bitten by atick and suffered from Lymesymptoms. He had saved thetick, which turned out to befrom the Ixodes Scapularisspecies.119

This vital clue would

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT


allow Steere to becomefamous by publishing apaper documenting thetransmission of the mysterydisease by Ixodid ticks.120 Acase can be made for theargument that Steere usedthe prestige offered by thisdevelopment to tragic effectover the ensuing years.

Indeed, Steere'sinstitutional ties gave himundeserved influence as an"expert" on Lyme disease.Unfortunately, Steere'sexpertise seems gearedtoward finding reasons forwhy patients didn't haveLyme disease and thereforedidn't need treatment. TheNew York Times summarizedSteere's history:

"As the world's fore-most expert on the illness,however, Steere did notbelieve many of them hadLyme disease at all, butsomething else … and he hadrefused to treat them withantibiotics. Many doctorsand insurance companieshad followed his lead, and inturn, hordes of patients hadstarted to stalk him."121

Over the years, thisso-called Steere-camp grouphas invented a non-existentLyme virus122 and a non-exis-tent species of Ixodid tick123

to justify the denial of antibi-otics124 to an expandinggroup of Lyme victims. (Thiscamp currently searches foran auto-immunemechanism125 which wouldexplain chronic Lyme diseasesymptoms independent ofan ongoing infection thatmight be cured throughantibiotics126 instead oftreated with a lifetime ofpharmaceuticals products.)

"To sum up the therapy ofLyme arthritis (Lyme dis-ease), it appears that at thispoint only symptomatictreatment is feasible…"

--Allen Steere et al.,Hospital Practice 143 (April

1978)

This fraudulentSteere-camp ideology hasbeen institutionalized in thehighly controversial, one-size-fits-allIDSA Lyme DiseaseTreatment Guidelines.127

These "guidelines" were sodraconian they were investi-gated by the ConnecticutAttorney General, who found"undisclosed financial inter-ests held by several of themost powerful IDSA pan-elists."128,129

Steere originallyworked for the corporation(Yale) that developed andlicensed the first Lyme vac-cine, Lymerix. He not onlyestablished the mythologythat has kept his patientsfrom getting effective treat-ment so that the vaccinecould be developed and mar-keted, but he also personallyoversaw the vaccine trialsand associated tests130 run bythe company that licensedthe vaccine from his previ-ous employer.

Steere admitted inone technical paper howhaving blood samples fromuntreated controls through-out the progression of thedisease was beneficial inmapping out the long-termimmune response to the dis-ease (this was critical fordeveloping a vaccine tomimic the antibody responseagainst the disease-agent):

"In two previousstudies, we used a uniqueset of serial serum samplesfrom untreated patientsmonitored throughout thecourse of Lyme disease inthe late 1970s prior to theuse of antibiotic therapy forthis illness. Only with this setof serum samples is it possi-ble to determine how theantibody responses to B.burgdorferi develop andchange during the variousstages of the illness."131

At the beginning ofthe epidemic, Steere system-atically ridiculed the notionthat antibiotics were effec-tive against the Lyme diseasebacterium132 that he erro-neously assumed133 was avirus.134 His group at Yalesaid the same thing,135 evenas doctors around him weresuccessfully treating patientswith antibiotics.136

"We remain skeptical thatantibiotic therapy helps..."

--Allen Steere, et. al.

When they could nolonger deny the obviousbeneficial effects of antibi-otics, Steere's camp sudden-ly switched to the otherextreme, claiming thatantibiotics were amazinglyeffective and therefore onlyextremely short courses ofantibiotics would completelycure Lyme disease. The com-mon thread in these twocontradictory ideologies isthat they are both rationalesfor denying patients effec-tive, long-term antibiotictreatment.

These positionsallowed Steere et al to con-duct what he later termed asa "natural experiment" in

which the deadly symptoms("sequelae") of the diseasecould be monitored over thelong term (as the "optimalantibiotic therapies were stillevolving"), just as they hadbeen in the CDC's TuskegeeExperiment with a similar,but less complicated, syphilisspirochete. As Steere, whoplayed an active part in dis-crediting "optimal antibiotictherapies" that other doctorswith far more limitedresources than Yale's finesthad managed to develop,137

shockingly admitted in 1994:"We studied persons

residing in an endemiccoastal area ofMassachusetts who werepreviously infected with B.burgdorferi in the early1980s. They contracted Lymedisease while the clinicalsyndromes and optimalantibiotic therapies were stillevolving, which offered a"natural experiment" for theidentification of risk factorsfor Lyme disease seque-lae."138

In her book, Lymeresearch pioneer PollyMurray hinted at Steere'sagenda in not treating Lymedisease, which was consis-tent with Tuskegee-like mon-itoring139 of the progressionof the damage induced bythe disease:

"He told us that hefelt that it was very impor-tant for him to follow all hispatients on a continuousbasis in order to know thestages of the disease."140

Steere even tookmeasures to ensure that thefraudulent ideology141 he cre-ated to maintain untreatedcontrols was enforced. Hepersonally testified against

SPECIAL REPORT


doctors who defied his care-fully designed disease per-petuation paradigm. As relat-ed by the New York Times:

"To patients withLyme disease perhaps Dr.Steere's most audacious ges-ture came in 1994 when hetestified at a board of medi-cine hearing against Dr.Joseph Natole of Saginaw,Mich., who was treatingpatients for chronic Lymedisease. Because Dr. Natolehad so many people onintravenous antibiotics,authorities charged him withmedical malpractice andinsurance fraud. Dr. Natolewas ultimately stripped ofhis medical license for sixmonths."142

Steere has not onlyhelped destroy the lives ofLyme doctors. He has sys-tematically ridiculed Lymepatients over the years--especially women.143 Echoingthe manner in which PollyMurray was initially treatedby the medical community,144

Steere has taken the positionthat many Lyme patientswant to be diagnosed withLyme disease. He was quot-ed in the New York Times:

''I suppose Lyme dis-ease is one of the few dis-eases that some people wantto have, because it's defined.I think it's very difficult tohave something that is notwell understood.''

On top of all this,Steere is a member of theEpidemic IntelligenceService, the CDC agencychartered with responding tobiowarfare agents releasedon U.S. soil, as well as devel-oping vaccines against them.(The EIS has boasted of itshistory in promoting vac-

cines.145)At this point, I

should add that I do notthink Steere has any poweron his own. He, and otherIvy League Lyme "experts"like him, are simply beingused as manufactured"thought-leaders" on behalfof the pharma-biowar estab-lishment to sell profit-friend-ly Tuskegee policy to thepublic. His undue influencereflects no expertise whatso-ever (other than milking gov-ernment grants to reach thesame conclusion year afteryear), just the reality that fartoo much unaccountableinfluence rests in too fewhands at the top of the eco-nomic ladder.

"The controversy in theLyme disease research is ashameful affair. And I saythat because the wholething is politically tainted.Money goes to people thathave for the past 30 yearsproduced the same thing:nothing."

--Willy Burgdorfer [name-sake of Lyme bacteri-

um]

The Blueprint Behind It All?Could a vaccine

agenda, under the pretext ofbiowarfare defense, explainwhy the EIS, and its point-man Allen Steere, were soheavily involved in control-ling the non-response to theLyme Epidemic, which start-ed just outside a biowarfarelab?

It is certainly feasi-ble that a two-step programwas put into place withrespect to a vaccine develop-ment and marketing agendafor Lyme disease.

Step-I would involvethe leaking of the pathogeninto the public,146 with asso-ciated treatment-preventionand cover-up techniquessubsequently employed bypharmaceutical companiesusing their influence overthe CDC and other regulato-ry agencies. This would keepthe public ignorant aboutthe nature and extent of thedisease, so that well-con-nected researchers (conve-niently doubling as pharma-ceuticals consultants andmilitary biowarfare experts)could monitor the immuneresponse of the disease inuntreated controls. Thisinformation could then beexploited to develop a vac-cine.

Once this phase wascomplete, and a candidatevaccine developed, wouldcome Step-II. The vaccinecould be tested under thesecrecy and human experi-mentation privileges afford-ed by the covert biowarfareresearch infrastructure,which has conducteddecades of destructiveexperiments with impunity.The health crisis createdthrough the "treatment-denial phase" of the vaccine-development experimentcould then be used to gener-ate demand and justifyimplementing the vaccine,despite predictable side-effects.

"The most serious and dis-appointing circumstancewas when I caught the CDCred-handed trying to... mas-querade opinion as datasupported by objective andprovable facts."

--Dr. Ed Masters, Lyme

researcher

The otherwise inex-plicable policies of theSteere camp, which aremore geared toward perpet-uating the epidemic thanhalting it, can be viewed asimplementing such a strate-gy. The Steere camp has cre-ated an environment con-ducive to developing andtesting vaccines and also onefor marketing them!

Such a strategy isnot as far out as it mayseem. The parameters thatwould lead to a favorablemarket for Lyme vaccineswere outlined in a blunt CDCpaper on the cost-effective-ness of a Lyme disease vac-cine. According to the con-clusions of the paper, vac-cines against Lyme diseasewould only be cost-effectiveif the probability of contract-ing Lyme disease wasincreased significantly fromthe existing levels. 147

(Published 1999).As Emma Hitt

explained in NatureMedicine,148 the cost-effec-tiveness argument for a vac-cine ("savings per case avert-ed") only made sense ifnearly an order of magni-tude increase in infectionrates took place:

"A cost-effectivenessanalysis of the Lyme diseasevaccine by the CDC indicatesthat the use of Lymerix vac-cine is justified only in areasin which the incidence ofLyme disease is high.

They found that themean net savings of vaccina-tion per case averted is$3,377 if the probability of

PUBLIC HEALTH ALERT


contracting Lyme disease isestimated at 0.03. However,the probability of contractingLyme disease is, in all but afew areas, less than 0.005."

The CDC vaccine-marketability authors foundthat, within parameter val-ues estimated to be accurateat the time when the firstLyme vaccine was being mar-keted, increasing the proba-bility of Lyme disease to 1%-3% would make the vaccineappear cost-effective. Theproblem was that, except fora few isolated areas, thisproposed probability of con-tracting Lyme was far higherthan actual infection rates.

Were CDC policies putinto place to correct this?

Were CDC-trained epi-demiologists (EIS), such asAllen Steere, put in place tojustify disastrous policies tomake the vaccine cost-effec-tive, as outlined in this CDC-authored publication?

Does this explain thedecades of outrageous CDCpolicies to the detriment ofthe public, allowing Lymedisease to spread generallyand its effects to worsenindividually beyond whatthey would have with propertreatment so that a vaccinecould be justified from afinancial standpoint?

"In recent years, drug com-panies have perfected a newand highly effective methodto expand their markets.Instead of promoting drugsto treat diseases, they havebegun to promote diseasesto fit their drugs."

--Marcia Angell, New York Review of Books

The CDC vaccine-marketability study spellsout how the "cost-savings ofvaccination" against Lymedisease can be computed byexamining "the effect ofcombinations of six inputs":

cost of vaccination

annual probability of con-tracting Lyme disease

costs of successfullytreating either early symp-toms of Lyme disease or oneof three sequelae

probability of diagnosingand treating early symptoms

probability of sequelaedue to early infection

probability of sequelaedue to late, disseminatedinfection

Thus, this articlereveals how a business casecould be made to offset thecosts of an expensive Lymedisease vaccine for each ofthese parameters, if

the probability of con-tracting the disease increas-es

the cost of treating Lymedisease increases

the probability of correct-ly diagnosing it decreases

the probability of effec-tively treating it decreases;and, correspondingly,

the probability of devel-

oping short- and long-termcomplications (sequelae)from Lyme disease increases

I propose that thisCDC article provides insightinto the overarching princi-ples behind the Steerecamp's "Lyme DiseaseCartel" (managed largely byCDC epidemiologists), andtherefore provides a blue-print of the real goalsbehind decades of disas-trous CDC Lyme diseasepolicies. 149

Indeed, with thisarticle as a backdrop, itshould be obvious that thepolicies advocated by theSteere-camp pharmaceuticalconsultants that have result-ed in abject misery for Lymevictims represent gain forvaccine interests.

The article explains:

The perpetuation ofmythologies (variations ofthe "hard to catch, easy tocure" myth) that allow theepidemic to spread morereadily (the "easy to catch,hard to cure" reality) whilekeeping the public and themedical community in thedark as to the true natureand extent of the disease

This increases the "prob-ability of contracting Lymedisease"

The promotion of notori-ously inaccurate testmethodologies over moreeffective ones, while grosslyunderplaying the effect thishas on the burgeoning epi-demic

This decreases

the "probability of diagnos-ing and treating early symp-toms" (while the epidemic isbuilding)

The promotionof ineffective, short-termantibiotic regimens overmore effective, long-termantibiotic regimens that havebeen developed throughyears of careful, empiricalresearch

This increasesthe "probability of sequelaedue to early infection; proba-bility of sequelae due to late,disseminated infection"

The systematicharassment of physicianswho learn how to diagnoseand treat the disease effec-tively by using these antibi-otic treatments

This bothdecreases the probability ofeffectively treating Lyme dis-ease and increases the prob-ability of generating short-and long-term disease symp-toms, the expensive treat-ments for which make a vac-cine look cost-effective bycomparison

The denial of therole of active infection insustaining long-term orchronic Lyme disease andthe associated symptoms

This alsodecreases the probability ofeffectively treating Lyme dis-ease at the source andincreases the probability ofgenerating long-term Lymedisease symptoms

The downplaying

SPECIAL REPORT


of chronic or asymptomaticinfections ultimately causinglong-term symptoms alsomakes the vaccine trials easi-er to conduct (allows ashorter surveillance timewith a shorter list of symp-toms to monitor)150

Indeed, the Lyme"vaccine marketability" argu-ment could also explainother controversial tenetslong held by the Steerecamp, including the follow-ing:

The overempha-sis of the relatively fast-developing Bull's-Eye rashsymptom (Erythemamigrans) as an indicator ofLyme disease, when thisoccurs in only half (or less)of Lyme victims151

The restricting ofLyme disease to an arthriticdisease, while absurdlydenying that numerous,debilitating symptoms (bothshort- and long-term) suchas cognitive and cardiacproblems are routinelyinduced by the disease.152

Overemphasizingthe prevalence of the Bull's-Eye rash and arthritis inLyme disease cases hasmajor benefits for vaccinedevelopment. By concentrat-ing on only one or two of the"protean manifestations" ofLyme disease, a vaccine canbe made to appear moreeffective by emphasizingshort-term conditions andignoring long-term ones.Additionally, the difficult andcostly problem of runningvaccine trials can be mademuch more manageable.

This is because, in additionto helping spread the infec-tion for reasons describedabove, the insistence thatLyme disease is characterizedby a fast-forming and easilyrecognized Bull's-Eye rashalong with arthritis symp-toms drastically shortens thesurveillance time (and thusthe required FDA approvaltime) in vaccine trials andeases the "surveillance crite-ria" defining a positive caseof Lyme disease followingexperimental vaccination.

Indeed, according tothe authors of one Lyme vac-cine study, the long lead-time, late-stage disease man-ifestations of Lyme diseasepresented unique and signifi-cant problems153 for vaccinetrials, since they requiredlonger and therefore moreexpensive monitoring peri-ods:

"Late-stage disease,which can occur weeks toyears following infection,may cause complex rheuma-tologic, neurological and car-diac manifestations. Thesevariable manifestations canmake definitivediagnosis problematic andpresent difficulties in deter-mining case definitions foruse in vaccine efficacy trials.The long latency period forthe appearance of symptomsalso has implications for atrial, since prolonged sur-veillance must beemployed."154 [emphasisadded]

Thus, by ignoringsymptoms that form overperiods of months to yearsand which are difficult andexpensive to diagnose and,by emphasizing symptomsthat are easy to diagnose

and monitor, the ability to make experimental vac-cine trials look more success-ful is enhanced.

This was the coursetaken in the trials for thefirst commercial vaccineagainst Lyme disease. Inspite of the fact thatresearchers associated withSmithKline Beecham admit-ted the size of the vaccinetrials "will not be sufficientto determine vaccine efficacyagainst rare manifestationsof LD with comfortable preci-sion," an IDSA meeting wasused to make ridiculouslyoveroptimistic statementsregarding the vaccine's effec-tiveness against so-calledasymptomatic manifesta-tions. According to one opti-mistic synopsis of the vac-cine trials:

"A study withLymerix®, manufactured bySmithKline BeechamBiologicals, presented at theInfectious Diseases Society ofAmerica (IDSA) meeting inPhiladelphia, showed thatafter three doses, Lymerixreduced the risk of asympto-matic Lyme disease infectionby 100 percent."155

Such absurd vaccinemarketing claims may alsoexplain why Steere himselfhas made so many state-ments trivializing these non-arthritic symptoms over theyears, and has recentlyclaimed that these asympto-matic cases are not only rarein American infections,156 butform over a period shortenough to have been moni-tored157 in his vaccine trial.

"The pharmaceutical com-panies depend upon a lot oftheir profits for drugs and so

on to treat chronic illnesses.These are patients theythink they are going to havefor the rest of their lives. Soit's a big profit center forthem. … They don't reallylike solutions to these ill-nesses because it cuts intotheir profits, long-term prof-its. So in that regard, theyhave not been our bestfriends."

--Dr. Garth Nicholson, for-mer David Bruton Jr. chair in

cancer research,Department of Tumor

Biology, the University ofTexas M.D. Anderson Cancer

Center, Houston

The Unrivaled DestructivePower of "Big Pharma"

Is there a powercenter capable of manipulat-ing the definition and treat-ment of a disease for such anefarious agenda? If so, howdoes it work?

The pharmaceuticalsindustry certainly has themoney and infrastructure tocarry out such an agenda.They also have a history rifewith such large-scaledoings.158

This vaccine-friendlyagenda is largely accom-plished by manufacturingthought-leaders159 out ofcompliant academics andkeeping them on retainer asconsultants to write pharma-friendly treatment guidelinesand publish pharma-friendlyarticles in pharma-dominat-ed medical journals. Suchthought leaders are also kepton retainer to serve as"expert witnesses" whendoctors who buck the systemare put on trial.160

The rotating doorbetween the pharmaceuti-

SPECIAL REPORT


cals industry, private medicalsocieties and governmenthealth agencies facilitatesthe implementation of a vac-cine-friendly agenda. Thiswas no more evident thanwhen former CDC directorDr. Julie Gerberding wasrecently selected to headMerck's vaccines division:

"As a pre-eminentauthority in public health,infectious diseases and vac-cines, Dr. Gerberding is theideal choice to lead Merck'sengagement with organiza-tions around the world thatshare our commitment tothe use of vaccines to pre-vent disease and savelives."161

Additionally, Dr.Carol Baker, past president ofIDSA and head of the Lymedisease definition panel(hearing panel) on IDSALyme guidelines wasappointed head of CDC advi-sory committee on vaccines.Conveniently "the 2009 IDSAinternational meetingfocused on Lyme vaccinedevelopment."162

These developmentsare consistent with the the-sis of this article that person-nel are being rotatedthrough government healthand military agencies (CDC),private medical societies(IDSA) and private pharma-ceuticals companies (Merckand others) to carry out dan-gerous, vaccine-friendlyhuman experimentation poli-cies under the hidden agen-da of biowarfare defense.

Also consistent withthis hypothesis is a develop-ment reported by Dr. MerleNass, who has been follow-ing the military's deadlyanthrax experimentation on

the public. Nass reports thatin addition to hiring directorsfrom the CDC, Merck hashired a high-level militaryvaccine expert to help mar-ket vaccines. According toNass, "retired Colonel JohnGrabenstein, Ph.D., who ledthe military anthrax vaccineprogram from 1999 through2006, supervised multiplepoorly conducted studies ofanthrax vaccine safety, thenmoved to Merck Vaccine as aVP."163

Of course all of thisorchestration takes lots ofmoney, planning, lobbyingand media censorship. Thepharmaceuticals industry hasunrivaled power in thisregard. It is the most prof-itable business on earth164

and correspondingly has themost expensive,165 exten-sive166 and effective167 lobbyin the U.S. Its lobbying is sosuccessful168 that it routinelyengages in illicit behavior,knowing the profits will farexceed any fines it is eventu-ally hit with (which often setrecords). These fines aremerely factored into the costof doing business.169

Conflicts of interestabound, with respect topharmaceuticals' companyinfluence over governmentregulatory agencies170 -including the FDA,171 NIH172

and the CDC.173 Other mediaoutlets have reported thatmembers of Congress ownpharmaceutical stocks.174

Alarmingly, thepharmaceuticals industry175

has historically played a piv-otal role in running theAmerican biological warfareprogram.

This role would givethe industry the ability to

create pathogens for whichprofitable symptom treat-ments could be sold in per-petuity. Since the pharma-ceutical industry dominatesthe CDC, medical educa-tion,176 medical press177,178 andmass media,179 the industry isnot likely to be held account-able for disseminatingpathogens for which theirwell-placed consultantscould ghost-write self-serv-ing treatment guidelines180,181

(bolstered by ghost-writtenstudies182,183), and help intimi-date doctors into compliancewith them,184,185 to keep theprofitable circle going.186 Theelite medical press has allbut given up on preventingsuch profit-oriented conflictsof interest.187

"Replacing medical educa-tion with industry promo-tion in the guise of scholar-ship causes demonstrableharm to trainees, the publicand the profession."188

--Dr. Amy C. Brodkey

Would pharmaceuti-cal companies perpetuateresearch with deadly, "shamantibiotics regimens" (suchas those short-term antibiot-ic regimens with ineffectivedrugs and doses typicallyrecommended for Lyme dis-ease) to make competingtreatments that are a threatto corporate profits look lesseffective by deliberatelyunder-dosing them?

Pfizer is accused ofdoing exactly this. It wassued in Nigeria for conduct-ing a deadly, unethical drugexperiment on children,without the permission oftheir parents.189 According toan article in the

Independent:The suit further con-

tends that the researchersgave the other half a com-parison drug made byPfizer's competitor Hoffman-La Roche, but deliberatelyunderdosed them to maketheir own product look bet-ter. Pfizer and its doctors"agreed to do an illegal act,"the suit says, "in a mannerso rash and negligent as toendanger human life".190

The fact that Lymedisease under-treatment hasbeen surrounded by so manyresearchers with biowarfareconnections explains whytheir deliberately ineffectivetreatment regimens (usingthe wrong drug at the wrongdose for the wrong period oftime to give the illusion oftreatment while preventingit, as was done in theTuskegee Study191) have notbeen widely exposed.

Unfortunately, thissituation is only gettingworse.

Sherwood Ross hasreported on the increasedcollaboration between thepharmaceutical industry andacademia in America's resur-gent biowarfare program:

"In case you didn'tknow it, the White Housesince 9/11 has called for spending $44 billion on bio-logical warfare research, asum unprecedented in worldhistory, and an obligingCongress has authorized it.Thus, some of the deadliestpathogens known tohumankind are being rekin-dled in hundreds of labs inpharmaceutical houses, uni-versity biology departmentsand on military bases.

...Besides the big


SPECIAL REPORTpharmaceutical houses, thebiowarfare buildup is gettingan enthusiastic responsefrom academia, which seesnew funds flowing from Washington's horn of plen-ty." According to FrancisBoyle, an international lawauthority at the University ofIllinois, Champaign... 'American universities have along history of willingly per-mitting their research agen-da, researchers, institutesand laboratories to be co-opted, corrupted and per-verted by the Pentagon andthe CIA.'192

Lyme Disease: The StuffDreams Are Made Of?

The Lyme diseaseepidemic has proved to be alucrative opportunity for thebiowarfare-connected corpo-rate-linked academics whomade their careers pretend-ing to investigate and treatit. Perhaps this explains theirreported excitement whenthe disease first broke out.

Polly Murray, thepioneer Lyme investigatorwho bore the brunt of thearrogance of the medicalestablishment that misdiag-nosed her and her family,193

records that the doctorspresent at her initial meetingwith Steere at Yale werestrangely enthusiastic aboutthe burgeoning epidemicthat was devastating hercommunity. She records onedoctor's strange commentson the newly discovered ill-ness: "Isn't this exciting?"

The tell-tale rashthat signaled the comingonset of symptoms associat-ed with Lyme disease causedSteere camp "experts" as farback as the mid-1970s to

view Lyme disease as amodel form of experimentalarthritis. Stephen Malawista,who oversaw Steere's initialinvestigation into the causeof Lyme arthritis, saw theBull's-eye rash as "the stuffthat rheumatologists'dreams are made of."

As summarized byJonathan Edlow, since "Lymearthritis had a definableonset, marked by the rash,rheumatologists could studythe joint inflammation in away that they could not for,say, rheumatoid arthritis orlupus." (The fact that the dis-ease was also caused by aninfectious agent that couldbe modified for use in a vac-cine was another plus.) Suchconsiderations would alsoplay into the ease with whichpost-vaccination rates ofinfections in experimentalpopulations could supposed-ly be monitored in vaccinetrials.194

No doubt Steere'sknowledge of the immuneresponse to Lyme disease,gained from his "study of 25untreated patients moni-tored longitudinally through-out the course of Lyme dis-ease" came in handy whenhe was put in charge of anexperimental Lyme vaccinetrial, while working at TuftsUniversity.195 This trial wasbased on the vaccine agentthat was licensed toSmithKlineBeecham bySteere's former employer(Yale). (The study was fund-ed jointly by SmithKlineBeecham Pharmaceuticalsand the CDC.)

In fact, scientistsfrom the vaccine manufac-turer credited Steere withadvising them on reducing

the background noise ofadverse reactions (some-thing he could claim to be anexpert at, having carefullymonitored the excruciatingsymptoms in numerousuntreated patients through-out the course of theiruntreated disease).

Steere played a piv-otal role in bringing the dis-astrous vaccine to market. Asthe "coordinating investiga-tor," he "coordinated andmonitored all laboratoryactivities, including assay val-idation, sample testing, andthe reporting of results." Healso advised the vaccineresearchers on adverse reac-tions, "especially the seriousadverse events." Steere'sassistance in this matter wasessential due to the fact that"the number of adverseevents was so large that itcould otherwise have beenconsidered 'too much back-ground noise.'"196

"We the people"need to ask this question:Did reducing this "back-ground noise" involve sup-pressing negative findings inthe form of "adverseevents"?197 Curiously,Steere's experimental vac-cine, the world's first vaccineto prevent Lyme disease, wasquickly pulled from the mar-ket in the face of multiplelawsuits once the public fig-ured out that adverse reac-tions were inducing symp-toms of the disease insteadof preventing them.198

SummaryThe institutionalized

Steere camp philosophy thatLyme disease is overdiag-nosed and overtreated hasbeen an epic disaster for

Lyme patient victims.200

The New York Timesquoted Murray, the womanwho conducted the firstinvestigation of Lyme diseasein Connecticut (until Steeretook it over201 and ran it intothe ground), summarizingSteere's philosophy of deny-ing the existence of chronicLyme disease and the bene-fits of long-term antibiotictreatment:

''I am dismayedabout Dr. Steere's position.He feels that it's overdiag-nosed and overtreated, but Isee people in the area whoare having a real strugglewith getting over Lyme dis-ease. And some of themhave responded to longer-term treatment.''

Murray has providedus an illuminating glimpseinto Steere's early investiga-tion of Lyme disease. Herstory, as one of the first vic-tims unfortunate enough tofall under Steere's dismissivecare (her husband was giventhe Tuskegee "aspirin thera-py"202 by Steere, et al atYale), vividly illustrates theongoing struggle with thearrogant Yale/CDC/IDSA aris-tocracy that has plagued theLyme community from thebeginning.203 This arrogancewas described by a Navydoctor named William Mastwho early on tried to informSteere that antibiotics couldbe effective against Lymedisease:

"Allen [Steere] atthat time was very adamantabout antibiotics havingabsolutely no role in the dis-ease. We left with some feel-ings of animosity at thatpoint. And the academicpeople made us feel like we

SPECIAL REPORT


obviously didn't know whatwe were doing. And weknew from our observationsthat we did."

Murray, who at firstnaively trusted Steere, hasgiven us a succinct summaryof the "widening gulf"between reality and Steere'sdeadly myth:

"There was a widen-ing gulf between what thepatients were experiencingand what most of the med-ical literature was reportingthat Lyme disease should belike. Patients were becomingconfused and frustrated bythe dilemmas in diagnosis.Dr. Steere seemed to be lessreceptive to what patientswere describing, and I felt itmore difficult to understandhis position on diagnosis,treatment, re-infection andsero-negative patients."

Dr. Ed Masters, aLyme doctor from Missouriwho more recently caughtthe CDC red-handed con-ducting a fraudulent investi-gation to justify denying theexistence and necessity oftreatment of Lyme disease inthe Southeast, gave ablunter summary of theestablishment's disastrous-yet-strident positions on thenature of Lyme disease:

"First off, they said itwas a new disease, which itwasn't. Then it was thoughtto be viral, but it isn't. Thenit was thought that sero-neg-ativity didn't exist, which itdoes. They thought it waseasily treated by short cours-es of antibiotics, whichsometimes it isn't. Then itwas only the Ixodes damminitick, which we now know isnot even a separate valid tickspecies. If you look through-

out the history, almost everytime a major dogmatic state-ment has been made aboutwhat we 'know' about thisdisease, it was subsequentlyproven wrong or underwentmajor modifications."

The Steere campexperts have indeed beenwrong along. Why shouldwe believe anything theynow say about the prof-itable Lyme Epidemic theycreated under the pretext ofbiowarfare-related vaccineresearch? Why should doc-tors be hamstrung by thetreatment guidelines Steere'sclones have created to per-petuate the epidemic underthe pretext of treating it?204

Was the CDC'sSteere camp "less receptiveto what patients weredescribing" because theywere being rewarded withperpetual research grants todevelop predetermined poli-cies consistent with disease-perpetuation for vaccinedevelopment and market-ing?

Given the source ofLyme disease, and the peo-ple behind the denial oftreatment, it is my opinionthat we are in the midst ofanother phase of the CDCTuskegee Experiment andtwin epidemics of disinfor-mation and disease.

For victims of thedisease and concerned mem-bers of the public, knowl-edge of the situation mustbe our own Phase I. Butknowledge without action isfruitless. It us up to us towage Phase II: alerting mem-bers of Congress and otherofficials and demandingaction.

And we cannot stop

until implementation ofPhase III: Making sure ourdemands are heard andacted on by turning theLyme Epidemic into the LymeSolution. This entails protec-tion for doctors who knowhow to treat Lyme andinforming other doctors andthe public at large about thenature of the epidemic andwho is behind its perpetua-tion. To this end,

President Obamamust extend the mission ofhis Presidential Commission,formed in the wake of recentrevelations on the expandingscope of the TuskegeeExperiment,205 to specificallyinvestigate the CDC's role inLyme disease treatment-denial.

Lyme disease is notmy problem, it is not theLyme community's problem.It is not an American prob-lem. It is now an internation-al problem. And it is up toyou, to all of you, to solve it.

Let the hauntingwords of Joseph Mengele,conductor of Nazi medicalexperiments, ring from thepast into the present: "Themore we do to you, the lessyou seem to believe we aredoing it.''

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:Jerry Leonard is a

Lyme disease patient andauthor. He has written threebooks on unethical medicalexperiments conducted bythe government -- includingexperiments involving thesystematic injection of tumorcells and monkey cancervirus in humans so thatmodel forms of cancer couldbe induced and maintained

in human subjects for vac-cine research. For anoverview of Jerry's work,see:

America's Secret Weapons:http://winstonsmith.net/americas_secret_weapons.htm

Contact Jerry at [email protected].

Additional Resources:

The source of Lymedisease has been traced to abiological warfare experi-ment gone out of controlthrough books, films, andtelevision documentaries.

Books:

Lab 257, by MichaelCarroll

http://search.barnesand-noble.com/books/product.aspx?userid=i98a5vf98j&isbn=0060011416&itm=3

Articles:

Elena Cook, "Lyme Is ABiowarfare Issue"

http://www.elenacook.org/bwsept06. html

Marjorie Tietjen,"Discreet Methods ofBiological Warfare"

http://www.pub-lichealthalert.org/Articles/marjorietietjen/Discreet%20Methods%20of%20Biological%20Warfare.html

Marjorie Tietjen, "LymeDisease - A Biological

SPECIAL REPORT


Weapon?"

http://www.rense.com/gen-eral63/lyme.htm

Mark Sanborne, "TheMystery of Plum Island:Nazis, Ticks and Weapons ofMass Infection"

http://www.ww4report.com/node/%201898

Tina J. Garcia,"Biowarfare Lab DirectorsAre Experts on Lyme Disease,A Level II DebilitatingBiological Agent"

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=189403

Videos/Documentaries:

Under the Eightball, doc-umentary by Tim Grey (filmlinks Lyme disease epidemicto biowarfare research)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UOhME0K4hw

Under Our Skin (film thatdocuments the non-treat-ment of Lyme disease vic-tims)

http://www.underourskin.com/

Plum Island episode,Jesse Ventura's "ConspiracyTheory" discusses Lyme dis-ease and biowarfarehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC1gV_6aSIA

Appendix A

Lyme-BiowarfareConnections

"…we are dealing here witha formidable 'smart stealth'type of bacteria that is hardto eradicate-one that doesextreme damage to psycheand soma if not treatedaggressively over the longterm when missed in thefirst days following inocula-tion by the vector..."

--Dr. Virginia Sherr

Researchers havedemonstrated the extensiveties between the CDC'sbiodefense unit and the per-petuation of the LymeEpidemic.

Here is a summaryof the connections betweenthe Lyme Epidemic andbiowarfare:

The causative agentof Lyme disease (Borreliaburgdorferi) was identifiedby and named after abiowarfare researchernamed Willy Burgdorfer, whoworked at a biowarfare lab(Rocky Mountain Labs)developing and publishingmethods for infecting Ixodidticks with Borrelia agents-adecade or so before an epi-demic caused by Borreliaagents spread by Ixodid ticksbroke out just outside a top-level biowarfare lab that didoutdoor tick research.

Lyme disease itself isnamed after Lyme,Connecticut-the town a fewmiles from a top-levelbiowarfare lab (Plum IslandAnimal Disease ResearchCenter) that not only didoutdoor tick experiments but

also has a history ofpathogen leaks.

Plum Island still con-ducts tick research withAfrican Swine Fever Virus,which, according to paperspublished by Lyme/biowar-fare experts such as AlanBarbour, has "sequence simi-larities" to segments of DNAin the telomeres of theBorrelia organism whichcauses Lyme disease.

Plum Island propa-gates this genetically engi-neered virus in ticks for vac-cine studies. This virus,according to numerousreports, has also reportedlybeen used by the U.S. inreal-world biological warfareattacks.

Lyme disease hasproperties ideal for a dis-abling biowarfare agent:rapid dissemination withinthe body but causingdelayed symptoms, relapsingantibiotic resistant infection,protective cyst formation(similar to anthrax), capabili-ty for inducing both mentaland physical incapacitation

Just as the Lymespirochete epidemic was get-ting started, we learned in1977 of a massive govern-ment research effort knownas MKULTRA that was "con-cerned with the research anddevelopment of chemical,biological and radiologicalmaterials" to do exactly whatLyme does: "severely" inca-pacitate human victims.

To accomplish thisgoal, the governmentengaged in "extensive testing

and experimentation" onunwitting human subjects"at all social levels, high andlow, native Americans andforeign."

The vector for Lymedisease (Ixodid ticks) was"discovered" by a biowarfaredefense expert (Allen Steere)from the CDC's EpidemicIntelligence Service (EIS).

The Lyme bacteriumwas first propagated in cellcultures by another CDC EISbiowarfare expert (AlanBarbour), in a biowarfarelab. This researcher had pre-viously studied anthrax forthe military, and went on tocreate mutant strains ofBorrelia burgdorferi. He nowdirects a biowarfare lab atthe University of California,Irvine Campus.

The Lyme Epidemicis being perpetuated byresearchers affiliated withthe CDC's biowarfaredefense unit (EIS), includingSteere (EIS) and EugeneShapiro (EIS) by forcing doc-tors to treat (or not treat)patients according to treat-ment guidelines that are sodraconian and riddled withself-serving recommenda-tions that the organizationthat put them out was inves-tigated and reprimanded bythe Attorney General ofConnecticut.

Gary Wormser is thelead author on the fraudu-lent treatment guidelinespublished by the IDSA, whichprevent patients from get-ting effective treatments. Inhis spare time, he lectures asan expert on biowarfare

SPECIAL REPORT


agents and treatments: HowGerms Become Weapons:Recognizing Agents --Treating Patients.)

The research studyWormser used to justify hisposition that Lyme disease isreadily cured with shortcourses of antibiotics was afraudulent study authored byMark Klempner, a CDC EISagent who also now directs abiowarfare lab, at BostonUniversity. (This celebratedstudy to allegedly investigatelong-term antibiotic treat-ment of Lyme patients washalted before long-termantibiotics could even beadministered. )

The first vaccineagainst the disease wasdeveloped and licensed by adefense contractor (YaleCorporation) that workedclosely with Plum Islandbiowarfare lab on biowarfare and vaccineagents. The lead investigatorfor the vaccine field trials(Steere) was a Yale and EISalumnus who has doneeverything in his power todeny effective antibiotictreatments to Lyme victims,so that the immuneresponse to the diseasecould be mapped out inuntreated controls.

Lyme disease wasrecently named as a biowar-fare agent by the U.S. gov-ernment.

Thus, it is not aquestion whether Lyme is abiowarfare agent. The ques-tion is, when was it firstinvestigated as one?

Related questions include:What are the odds

that a Borrelia disease agentspread by Ixodid ticks andthe policies of the CDC'sbiowarfare unit, which hasbeen identified by the gov-ernment as a potentialbiowarfare agent, would benamed after a biowarfareresearcher who publishedmethods for infecting Ixodidticks with Borrelia agents?

What are the odds aBorrelia disease that brokeout just outside a biowarfarelab that conducted tickresearch is not a biowarfareagent?

And what are theodds that treatment denialfor this disease agent, whichis controlled by variousagents of the biowarfarewing of an agency that con-ducted experiments limitingtreatment for a similar dis-ease agent (both the LymeBorrelia and syphilis are clas-sified as spirochetes), is notpart of a similar experimentconducted on a granderscale, under the auspices ofbiowarfare research?

"The number of Steerecamp Lyme researchers witha background in theEpidemic IntelligenceService (EIS) and/or biowar-fare research is too numer-ous to be pure coincidence.Two scientists who haveplayed a central role in theLyme story, Barbour andKlempner, have been placedin charge of new biowarsuper-labs set up in theaftermath of 9-11, wherethey are aided by some oftheir Steerite colleagues.Others, while not in charge

of super-labs, are neverthe-less in receipt of substantialgrants for biowarfareresearch."

--Elena Cook, "Lyme Is ABiowarfare Issue"

Appendix B

The research historyof Willy Burgdorfer, name-sake of Lyme disease:

In the 1950s, WillyBurgdorfer, who isolated thetick-vectored Lyme diseasespirochete and for whom thecausative Borrelia is named,worked on artificially forcingBorrelia disease agents (likerelapsing fever Borrelias) toinfect new tick vectors.(Burgdorfer then used theseartificially infected ticks inattempts to infect lab ani-mals. )

He also publishedpapers describing the "occultinfections" due to theserelapsing fever spirochetedisease agents. In parallelwith these studies, he devel-oped production-like meth-ods for transferring diseasesto Ixodid ticks, the samespecies that spreads theoccult Borrelia infection ini-tially called Lyme disease,which Burgdorfer later com-pared to the relapsing feverBorrelias he had studied.

The lab he conduct-ed this research in and whichlater isolated the Lyme spiro-chete is now a "biosafetylevel 4" biowarfare researchfacility, just like the biowar-fare lab at the epicenter ofthe Lyme Epidemic (PlumIsland Animal DiseaseCenter), which conductedoutdoor tick research and issuspected of being thesource of the Lyme

Epidemic. Given the manner in

which Lyme disease brokeout and the deadly mannerin which it has been inten-tionally mismanaged eversince, hard questions mustbe asked:

When Burgdorferwas developing techniquesto artificially expand thehost-range of Borrelias tonew tick species, and then tolab animals, was he in factconducting biological war-fare research at the RockyMountain Laboratory?

Did this researchfeed in to the tick researchthat was conducted at PlumIsland Animal DiseaseCenter, the outdoor biowartest facility for such insectvectors? And was PlumIsland,the outdoor test facili-ty for Fort Detrick, the cen-ter of the U.S. biological war-fare effort?

Was the causativeagent of Lyme disease later"discovered" by a militaryepidemiologist as part of asuspected publicrelations/containment effortto control information aboutthe burgeoning epidemicand its ties to the military?

Did this effort sur-rounding the so-called "natu-ral" outbreak of a zoonoticagent lead to an experimen-tal vaccine effort (orchestrat-ed by CDC/EIS biowarfareagents) similar to that whichhappened in Egypt, whenhuman vaccine experimentswere conducted after the"natural" outbreak of RiftValley fever virus, an out-

SPECIAL REPORT


break that occurred in thesame time-frame as theLyme disease outbreak?

In the time periodleading up to the LymeEpidemic, Burgdorfer workedfor the military in a capacityconsistent with this hypothe-sis: He was a member of theArmed Forces EpidemiologyBoard investigating insectvectored diseases. The dis-astrous non-response to theLyme Epidemic has beenorchestrated by military epi-demiologists using theirinfluence in the government,medical infrastructure andmedia.

Appendix C

Open Letter Written to theWorld Warning of CDC andIDSA Complicity inDeliberately MistreatingLyme Victims

By Tina Garcia

Founder of Lyme EducationAwareness Program (L.E.A.P.Arizona)www.leaparizona.com

Tina Garcia is a Lymevictim and patient advocatewho has caught her stateepidemiologist red-handedpublishing research estab-lishing Western blackleggedticks in Arizona tentativelyidentified as Lyme diseaseand then subsequently deny-ing that information to her inwriting. Tina has also docu-mented the fraud behind theCDC's and IDSA's treatmentguidelines.

I am a chronic Lyme

disease patient and advocatewho has struggled withBorrelia burgdorferi (Bb)infection for twelve years,since 1998. The bacteriaravaged my body for sixyears before I was finallydiagnosed and began antibi-otic treatment at the end of2004. At one point I couldbarely walk and could noteffectively communicate dueto encephalopathy, neuro-logical and musculoskeletalinvolvement. I became dis-abled from the disease andlost my job and my home.

To this day, it hasbeen a devastating journey,and this debilitating chronicinfection caused by the biteof a tick in Arizona has pro-foundly altered my life. Icould not find one doctor onmy insurance plan whowould provide treatment.Therefore, my insurancedenied coverage, and myfamily had to pay for it. Wewere never able to affordthe intravenous antibioticsthat were recommended bymy Lyme-treating physicians.The delayed diagnosis anddenial of treatment extend-ed my suffering, caused dis-ability and has prevented afull recovery thus far. Mycase is not unique; thou-sands have reported thesame lack of medical care.

I am not shy to statepublicly that the main reasonfor the denial of diagnosisand treatment and terriblesuffering that I have experi-enced was caused directly bythe Infectious DiseasesSociety of America's ClinicalPractice Guidelines for LymeDisease and the Centers forDisease Control andPrevention's (CDC) dissemi-

nation of those Guidelineson its website.

Another reason forthe medical neglect of Lymepatients is the failure of theNational Institutes of Health(NIH) to conduct meaningfultreatment studies. To date,the efforts of the NIH havebeen unconscionably weakin this area. Studies shouldhave been conducted a longtime ago to determine theefficacy of long-term combi-nations of antibiotics(months to years, as is pro-vided for tuberculosis andleprosy infections), in searchof an effective treatmentprotocol to alleviate thewidespread suffering andloss of productivity experi-enced by those who havedeveloped chronic Lymeinfection, due to lack oftimely diagnosis and treat-ment.

Of particular signifi-cance, the NIH study per-formed by IDSA guidelineauthor, Mark Klempner,M.D., was a study that wasanalyzed statistically by sta-tistical scientist AlisonDelong and found to beflawed.

It would be consid-ered inhumane to bring upthe issue of antibiotic resist-ance when referring topatients receiving long-termtreatment for tuberculosis orleprosy, both of which arebacterial infections. Leprosyand Lyme disease share theability to damage the nerv-ous system.

Why then, do theCDC and IDSA find it accept-able to publish articles andguidelines that encouragethe denial of long-termantibiotic therapy to

Borreliosis patients, basedupon the premise that suchtreatment causes antibioticresistance? Do the CDC andIDSA endorse the practice ofsacrificing Lyme diseasepatients, who are afflictedwith neurological damagefrom embedded infectionand resulting persistentinflammation, on the altar ofantibiotic resistance, in aneffort to save antibiotic usefor others?

Professor GarthNicolson, a microbiologistwho has studied Bb, statedthat the antibiotic resistanceargument is "particularlylame." He explained thatanother reason for antibioticresistance is the INADE-QUATE antibiotic treatmentof virulent pathogens, suchas Borrelia burgdorferi, thebacterium that causes Lymedisease. If you have everreceived a prescription forantibiotics from the pharma-cy, you may recall that thesticker on the side of thebottle recommends that allthe medication be usedaccording to the instructions- that all of it should betaken by the patient. Thisrecommendation is madebecause UNDERTREATMENTof bacterial infections causesantibiotic resistance.

Therefore, each timea physician adheres to IDSAtreatment guidelines forLyme disease, they are con-tributing to the antibioticresistance of Borreliaburgdorferi. Each time aLyme disease patient isUNDERTREATED, Bb under-goes antigenic variation. Inother words, it changes toevade the immune systemand antibiotics. This is

SPECIAL REPORT


another way that thepathogen persists in the tis-sues (not only the blood) ofthose who are infected.

In addition, there isno definitive test that provesthat Bb is eradicated withthe recommended treat-ment set forth by the CDCand IDSA. Numerous tissuesamples would need to becollected and tested todetermine this, as Bb doesnot predominantly reside inthe blood, at times render-ing antibody tests inconclu-sive. In order to eradicateBb from the brain, antibi-otics must be administeredwhich cross the blood-brainbarrier to get into the cere-brospinal fluid, and not allantibiotics are able to dothis.

The good news forme is that I have made sig-nificant progress throughthe use of intermittentantibiotic therapy (oral andintramuscular injections) forthe past six years. That's alot of antibiotic, but theantibiotics have allowed meto regain function. I amgrateful for the progress Ihave made, and my hope isto get to a point where I cango back to work as a func-tioning and productivemember of society.However, I am now sufferingfrom small vessel disease inmy brain and multiple scle-rosis-type symptoms whichincapacitate me periodically.

I was selected byConnecticut AttorneyGeneral Richard Blumenthaland the Infectious DiseasesSociety of America (IDSA)Lyme Disease Review Panelto testify on behalf of theworldwide Lyme disease

patient community at a legalhearing held in Washington,D.C. on July 30, 2009.

The hearing was theresult of an antitrust investi-gation of the IDSA and itsLyme Disease PracticeGuideline authors, whichwas conducted by thenConnecticut AttorneyGeneral (now SenatorBlumenthal).

It was a privilege tospeak on behalf of thou-sands of people sufferingfrom chronic Lyme infection.However, the outcome ofthe hearing and the exten-sive review of submittedmedical research, that clear-ly showed the existence ofpersistent Lyme infectiondespite antibiotic treatment,was a rubber stamping ofthe current IDSA Guidelines,with no immediate changesrecommended by theReview Panel. This decisionhas served the insuranceindustry by guaranteeing thecontinuation of diagnosisand treatment denials, asinsurance companies basetheir denials on the IDSAPractice Guidelines for Lymedisease.

Although the infor-mation I am submitting iscontrary to what has beenreported in numerous arti-cles in the mass media, it isthe truth about the medicalneglect that Lyme diseasepatients are experiencing.Lyme disease patients havestruggled for more than thir-ty-five years, due to a com-plicated web of issuesinvolving inadequate testingmethods, ineffective treat-ment recommendationspublished by the IDSA andthe failure of the NIH and

the CDC to perform new andutilize existing patient-cen-tered research.

By definition,screening tests should haveat least 95% sensitivity. TheELISA screening test that isrecommended by the CDClacks such sensitivity andfalls short in its specificity,thereby missing detection ofa significant number ofcases. Such a scenariowould be unacceptable forHIV, syphilis, hepatitis,tuberculosis, heart disease,diabetes and cancer; it is,therefore, unacceptable forLyme infection, also.

During the Lymerixvaccine clinical trials, chiefinvestigator Dr. Allen Steeredid not use the ELISAbecause of its lack of sensi-tivity and specificity.

"ELISA's are com-mercially available but lacksufficient sensitivity andspecificity for use in efficacytrials…The CDC criteria,however, were developed asa surveillance tool, whichfrequently necessitates acompromise between sensi-tivity and specificity to reachthe optimal surveillanceobjective….The CDC criteriawere therefore deemed tobe inadequate for the pur-pose of conducting a pivotalefficacy trial."

It is, therefore, obvi-ously inappropriate for theELISA to be used as ascreening test in the clinicalsetting, for if and only if theELISA is positive are patients"allowed" to progress to thenext level of testing -- theWestern blot:

"This study con-firmed in the reference andresearch laboratory setting

the previously documentedproblems with accuracy andprecision of serodiagnostictests by using WCS antigensof B. burgdorferi (4-11). Thestudy confirmed that a seri-ous disparity existedbetween the test resultsobtained by CDC and thoseobtained by academic refer-ence centers with the besttesting performances. Theseresults guided correctiveaction and led to the adop-tion by CDC and ASTPHLD ofa two-test approach to sero-diagnosis (23), which formsthe basis for the futurenational standardization ofLyme disease serologic test-ing methods."

How many hoopsmust patients jump throughto receive diagnosis andtreatment? In the case ofLyme disease, half of thepatients cannot make itthrough the first hoop (theELISA), and therefore, neverget the chance to be testedby way of the second(Western blot).

This testing recom-mendation leaves approxi-mately half of all patientswith no diagnosis or treat-ment -- that is certainlymedical neglect. Due to itsfallibility, the CDC's serodi-agnostic testing recommen-dation for use of the ELISAas a screening test for Lymedisease should bereassessed by an unbiasedcommittee not associatedwith the CDC or individualsinvolved in creating theDearborn recommendation(which would includeauthors of the IDSA PracticeGuidelines that were investi-gated by the ConnecticutAttorney General).

SPECIAL REPORT


General, along with otherspokespersons for the CDC.This is a small group ofresearchers who have, formany years, continuallyreceived a large portion ofthe federal research fundsallocated for Lyme disease.Their unfounded statementsthat chronic Lyme infection does not exist directly con-tradict the research theyhave already published inwhich they did, indeed,demonstrate persistentinfection. In fact, there is nouncertainty about chronicinfection among patients andthe physicians who actuallytreat patients with chronicLyme disease.

If patients do notreceive diagnosis in the earlystage, the disease will devel-op into a chronic,relapsing/remitting illnessthat becomes even harder todiagnose and treat.Attempting to clear anembedded infection (onethat has persisted for severalyears), with an early-stage,short-term treatment proto-col as has been recommend-ed by the IDSA, is ludicrous.Borrelia burgdorferi colo-nizes all the organs and tis-sues of the body, and due toits antigenic variation, itsbiofilm and its ability tomorph into evasive forms,repeated courses of variousantibiotics are needed tofight the embedded infec-tion.

In the hurried worldof practicing clinicians, it iseasy for the line betweenacute and chronic treatmentrecommendations to appearnebulous, and those whoespouse the CDC/IDSA partyline are quite adept at

smudging the line thatshould separate acute fromchronic treatment. In fact,the Lyme Medical Cartel hascontinually used the mediato accomplish their despica-ble dissemination of falsemedical information.However, if one reads thepublished literature andmakes the crucial distinctionbetween the research onacute and the research onchronic Lyme infection, onewill see that there actually isno controversy at all. Thecontroversy has been fabri-cated by the Lyme MedicalCartel.

Patients are in des-perate need for governmenthealthcare agencies, such asthe CDC, to utilize researchthat has already demonstrat-ed persistent infection. Youwill hear so-called "Lymeexperts" make statementsthat chronic Lyme diseasedoes not exist. You will alsohear them reference termsthey coined - Post LymeSyndrome (PLS) andMedically UnexplainedSymptoms (MUS). There isno proof of the existence ofeither PLS or MUS in relationto infection from Borreliaburgdorferi; these are mere-ly opinions passed off as con-sensus.

Once again, much ofthe research on persistentinfection has been publishedby the individuals who arenow calling persistent infec-tion "Post Lyme Syndrome"and "Medically UnexplainedSymptoms. " They are,therefore, contradicting theirown research. Their contra-dictions, published in theIDSA Practice Guidelines,have resulted in the wasteful

use of federal researchfunds, caused insurancedenials of treatment and themedical neglect of sufferingpatients.

In my opinion, theNIH and CDC have continual-ly wasted precious fundingallocated by Congress, whichshould instead be utilized forpatient-centered research,not pet projects of individu-als investigated for theirfinancial conflicts of interestrelated to Lyme vaccines,patents for diagnostic testsand consulting arrangementswith insurance companies.

The GeneralAccounting Office (GAO) pre-viously investigated the mat-ter of research funds forLyme disease and deter-mined that the CDC did, infact, spend appropriatedfunds on Lyme diseaseresearch. This determina-tion, although accurate, didnot expose the researchmonopoly that existsbetween the CDC and the"most powerful IDSA pan-elists" who authored theIDSA Practice Guidelines forLyme disease. Yes, theyfunded Lyme research, butthe majority of the fundshave been granted to mem-bers of the Lyme MedicalCartel, who in my opinion,take their marching ordersfrom the CDC.

ConnecticutAttorney General Blumenthalrevealed the following in hisMay 1, 2008, Press Release:

"The IDSA guidelineshave sweeping and signifi-cant impacts on Lyme dis-ease medical care. They arecommonly applied by insur-ance companies in restrictingcoverage for long-term

antibiotic treatment or othermedical care and also strong-ly influence physician treat-ment decisions."Insurance companies havedenied coverage for long-term antibiotic treatmentrelying on these guidelinesas justification. The guide-lines are also widely cited forconclusions that chronicLyme disease is nonexistent.

"This agreement vin-dicates my investigation --finding undisclosed financialinterests and forcing areassessment of IDSA guide-lines. My office uncoveredundisclosed financial inter-ests held by several of themost powerful IDSA pan-elists. The IDSA's guidelinepanel improperly ignored orminimized consideration ofalternative medical opinionand evidence regardingchronic Lyme disease, poten-tially raising serious ques-tions about whether the rec-ommendations reflected allrelevant science.

"The IDSA's 2006Lyme disease guideline panelundercut its credibility byallowing individuals withfinancial interests -- in drugcompanies, Lyme diseasediagnostic tests, patents andconsulting arrangementswith insurance companies --to exclude divergent medicalevidence and opinion.

In today's healthcaresystem, clinical practiceguidelines have tremendousinfluence on the marketingof medical services andproducts, insurance reim-bursements and treatmentdecisions. As a result, med-ical societies that publishsuch guidelines have a legaland moral duty to use exact-

SPECIAL REPORT


Published researchhas demonstrated thatBorrelia burgdorferi usesantigenic variation to evadethe host's immune system,thereby ensuring its survivaland causing persistent infec-tion. Bb has the ability tomorph into various forms. Itis commonly recognized as acorkscrew-shaped spiro-chete; however, it canchange into a cyst form, acell-wall-deficient form, agranular form and a blebform and protects itself witha biofilm that sequesters itfrom attack by the immunesystem and antibiotics.

Published researchindicates that "the interplaybetween the host and invad-ing spirochetes results in acascade of signaling eventsthat B. burgdorferi can useto facilitate persistent infec-tion."

Uncertainty aboutthe existence of chronicLyme infection is a directresult of misleading informa-tion and opinions that havebeen circulated by the IDSAGuideline authors who wereinvestigated by theConnecticut AttorneyGeneral, along with otherspokespersons for the CDC.This is a small group ofresearchers who have, formany years, continuallyreceived a large portion ofthe federal research fundsallocated for Lyme disease.Their unfounded statementsthat chronic Lyme infection does not exist directly con-tradict the research theyhave already published inwhich they did, indeed,demonstrate persistentinfection. In fact, there is nouncertainty about chronic

infection among patients andthe physicians who actuallytreat patients with chronicLyme disease.

If patients do notreceive diagnosis in the earlystage, the disease will devel-op into a chronic,relapsing/remitting illnessthat becomes even harder todiagnose and treat.Attempting to clear anembedded infection (onethat has persisted for severalyears), with an early-stage,short-term treatment proto-col as has been recommend-ed by the IDSA, is ludicrous.Borrelia burgdorferi colo-nizes all the organs and tis-sues of the body, and due toits antigenic variation, itsbiofilm and its ability tomorph into evasive forms,repeated courses of variousantibiotics are needed tofight the embedded infec-tion.

In the hurried worldof practicing clinicians, it iseasy for the line betweenacute and chronic treatmentrecommendations to appearnebulous, and those whoespouse the CDC/IDSA partyline are quite adept atsmudging the line thatshould separate acute fromchronic treatment. In fact,the Lyme Medical Cartel hascontinually used the mediato accomplish their despica-ble dissemination of falsemedical information.However, if one reads thepublished literature andmakes the crucial distinctionbetween the research onacute and the research onchronic Lyme infection, onewill see that there actually isno controversy at all. Thecontroversy has been fabri-

cated by the Lyme MedicalCartel.

Patients are in des-perate need for governmenthealthcare agencies, such asthe CDC, to utilize researchthat has already demonstrat-ed persistent infection. Youwill hear so-called "Lymeexperts" make statementsthat chronic Lyme diseasedoes not exist. You will alsohear them reference termsthey coined - Post LymeSyndrome (PLS) andMedically UnexplainedSymptoms (MUS). There isno proof of the existence ofeither PLS or MUS in relationto infection from Borreliaburgdorferi; these are mere-ly opinions passed off as con-sensus.

Once again, much ofthe research on persistentinfection has been publishedby the individuals who arenow calling persistent infec-tion "Post Lyme Syndrome"and "Medically UnexplainedSymptoms. " They are,therefore, contradicting theirown research. Their contra-dictions, published in theIDSA Practice Guidelines,have resulted in the wastefuluse of federal researchfunds, caused insurancedenials of treatment and themedical neglect of sufferingpatients.

In my opinion, theNIH and CDC have continual-ly wasted precious fundingallocated by Congress, whichshould instead be utilized forpatient-centered research,not pet projects of individu-als investigated for theirfinancial conflicts of interestrelated to Lyme vaccines,patents for diagnostic testsand consulting arrangements

with insurance companies.The General

Accounting Office (GAO) pre-viously investigated the mat-ter of research funds forLyme disease and deter-mined that the CDC did, infact, spend appropriatedfunds on Lyme diseaseresearch. This determina-tion, although accurate, didnot expose the researchmonopoly that existsbetween the CDC and the"most powerful IDSA pan-elists" who authored theIDSA Practice Guidelines forLyme disease. Yes, theyfunded Lyme research, butthe majority of the fundshave been granted to mem-bers of the Lyme MedicalCartel, who in my opinion,take their marching ordersfrom the CDC.

ConnecticutAttorney General Blumenthalrevealed the following in hisMay 1, 2008, Press Release:

"The IDSA guidelineshave sweeping and signifi-cant impacts on Lyme dis-ease medical care. They arecommonly applied by insur-ance companies in restrictingcoverage for long-termantibiotic treatment or othermedical care and also strong-ly influence physician treat-ment decisions."Insurance companies havedenied coverage for long-term antibiotic treatmentrelying on these guidelinesas justification. The guide-lines are also widely cited forconclusions that chronicLyme disease is nonexistent.

"This agreement vin-dicates my investigation --finding undisclosed financialinterests and forcing areassessment of IDSA guide-

SPECIAL REPORT


lines. My office uncoveredundisclosed financial inter-ests held by several of themost powerful IDSA pan-elists. The IDSA's guidelinepanel improperly ignored orminimized consideration ofalternative medical opinionand evidence regardingchronic Lyme disease, poten-tially raising serious ques-tions about whether the rec-ommendations reflected allrelevant science.

"The IDSA's 2006Lyme disease guideline panelundercut its credibility byallowing individuals withfinancial interests -- in drugcompanies, Lyme diseasediagnostic tests, patents andconsulting arrangementswith insurance companies --to exclude divergent medicalevidence and opinion.

In today's healthcaresystem, clinical practiceguidelines have tremendousinfluence on the marketingof medical services andproducts, insurance reim-bursements and treatmentdecisions. As a result, med-ical societies that publishsuch guidelines have a legaland moral duty to use exact-ing safeguards and scientificstandards."

Cancer patients aregiven the choice ofchemotherapy with danger-ous drugs that not onlydestroy cancer cells, butcause extensive damage tothe rest of the body, as well.Despite the risks associatedwith cancer chemotherapy,cancer patients are givenadditional treatment whenthey relapse, and physiciansspecializing in cancer thera-py are not discouraged fromdoing so.

Lyme diseasepatients do not relish usingantibiotics for prolongedperiods, just as cancerpatients do not enjoy under-going chemotherapy.However, at the presenttime, antibiotic therapy isthe only treatment that pro-vides relief and improvementin symptoms, and the choiceof accepting the risks ofintravenous infusion ofantibiotics should rest withthe patient and their treatingphysician, not the IDSA,which the majority of Lymepatients view as a pseudo-paternalistic medical dicta-torship.

Veteran Lymepatients are quite knowl-edgeable of the disease theyare infected with and mostcan talk circles around med-ical doctors who have noexperience treating the dis-ease. It is simple reasoningto come to the conclusionthat the majority of IDSAmember physicians fall intothis category, as they denythe existence of the disease.

Therefore, if IDphysicians deny the exis-tence of Lyme disease andrefuse to treat patients, theydon't have any experiencewith the disease, correct?So, how can they refer tothemselves as Lyme experts?Such a physician would actu-ally be considered a charla-tan. The IDSA mantra thatchronic Lyme disease doesnot exist is the blindfold thatallows these sheepish IDSAmember physicians to fall offthe cliff into an abyss ofignorance and arrogance.

Research hasdemonstrated the remittingand relapsing nature of Lyme

disease infection. It is,therefore, inhumane to denyLyme patients access to long-term antibiotic therapy thatis legally prescribed bylicensed physicians. If Lymedisease patients are willingto accept the risks of suchtreatment in lieu of a chron-ic, debilitating, infectious dis-ease, insurance companiesshould provide coverage forsuch treatment and not shirktheir responsibility basedupon the IDSA PracticeGuidelines - guidelines thatwere written by those who,at the same time that theypublish guidelines for use bythe insurance industry, theyalso serve as insurance con-sultants and expert witness-es in medical board prosecu-tions against physicians whoactually have experiencetreating the disease.

Lyme diseasepatients expect insurancecompanies to cover long-term antibiotic therapy, ifsuch therapy is recommend-ed by their treating physi-cians. In the clinical setting,Lyme disease patients andtreating physicians have con-sistently reported evidenceof in utero transmission andsuspect sexual transmission,as well. Due to the fact thatBorrelia burgdorferi hasbeen found to live in frozenblood for up to eightmonths, transmission via ournation's blood supply shouldalso be studied and givenserious consideration.

Studies on suchmodes of transmission havenot been adequately pur-sued. I have strongly urgedthat such research be fundedand performed immediately,as our failure to address

these important issues oftransmission of Lyme dis-ease, a spirochetal diseasethat is similar to syphilis,may be jeopardizing publichealth and perpetuating thepandemic.

The Lyme patientcommunity has requestedassistance from the CDC andthe IDSA for many years, butpatients have been eitherignored or publicly ridiculed.Thus the need for me towrite this lengthy essay as apublic service.

The Lyme patientcommunity no longer reliesupon the CDC or the IDSA tobe the guardians of ourhealth, as the research andprograms that are fundedand performed by them andthe clinical practice guide-lines that are published anddisseminated by them arenot "patient-centered." Noris the research that demon-strates the existence of per-sistent infection utilized bythe CDC and IDSA for thebenefit of patients.

Instead, theresearch is contradicted, orsimply ignored, in favor ofpersonal agenda-promotingopinions and manufactureddisease parameters. Asrevealed formerly in the CTAttorney General's PressRelease, these financial con-flicts of interest wereexposed during the antitrustinvestigation of the IDSA andits 2006 Lyme DiseasePractice Guideline authors.Unfortunately, the AttorneyGeneral was not able toextend his investigation intothe bowels of the monopoly-- the CDC and its Division ofVector-Borne InfectiousDiseases, and possibly, the

SPECIAL REPORT


United States Public HealthService, which if you recall,led the Tuskegee Study ofSyphilis from 1932 to 1972.

Despite extensivefunding for Lyme diseaseresearch, the healthcareneeds of Lyme diseasepatients have been neglect-ed for too long. Preciousfunds are wasted by thosewho place their own inter-ests in developing a Lymevaccine and marketable testkits above the health needsof patients. Clinical practiceguidelines are being writtenand published to serve thepersonal agendas of theauthors and those who havea stake in the guidelines,barring the most importantstakeholders - the patients.

The irresponsiblebehavior of the IDSA priorto, during and following theinvestigation and reviewprocess of the IDSA PracticeGuidelines for Lyme disease,in the form of fraudulentpublic statements thatchronic Lyme infection doesnot exist and their continueddissemination of other falseinformation, has caused themajority of their infectiousdisease member physiciansto deny diagnosis and treat-ment to chronic Lyme dis-ease patients.

The CDC plays aleading role on the worldstage of health. The CDCprovides a link to the IDSAPractice Guidelines for Lymedisease on its website, andthis action has resulted indiagnosis and treatmentdenial to chronic Lyme dis-ease patients in the U.S. andin other endemic countriesaround the globe.

At the recent

October Institute ofMedicine forum on the stateof the science of Lyme dis-ease, the patient communitysuggested that funding begiven to other researchersnot involved in the LymeMedical Cartel researchmonopoly. This monopoly isthe one that WillyBurgdorfer, Ph.D., discovererof the Lyme disease bacteri-um, referred to when hemade the following state-ment in the film "Under OurSkin":

"The controversy inLyme disease research is ashameful affair. And I saythat because the whole thingis politically tainted. Moneygoes to people who have, forthe past 30 years, producedthe same thing-nothing.Serology has to be startedfrom scratch with peoplewho don't know beforehandthe results of their research."

Allowing the currentIDSA treatment guidelines,and their tacit endorsementby the CDC, to stand as afactual reference is irrespon-sible medicine that continuesthe damaging medical neg-lect of thousands of patientswho have been diagnosedwith Lyme disease in North,Central and South America,Europe, Asia and Australia.This is an infectious diseasepandemic that is disablingpeople worldwide.Many patients who havebeen diagnosed with multi-ple sclerosis, ALS,Parkinson's, Alzheimer's,rheumatoid arthritis,fibromyalgia, chronic fatigueand lupus have subsequentlybeen diagnosed with andtreated for Borrelia burgdor-feri infection. The reason

these diagnoses are madeinitially is because chronicLyme infection can manifestas all of these conditions.Published medical researchhas also shown that Borreliaburgdorferi can cause certain types of cancer.

If you read theTuskegee Timeline on theCDC website, you may besurprised at the similaritiesbetween the Tuskegee Studyof Syphilis that was inhu-manely carried out by theUnited States Public HealthService / condoned by theCDC and the denial of diag-nosis and treatment forthose infected with Borrelia(a cousin to syphilis).

The journalist whobroke the story of theTuskegee Study in the 1970shelped bring closure to thatinhumane medical "study"that resulted in a publicapology from PresidentClinton and a financial settle-ment with the victims andtheir families.

It is time for addi-tional investigations(Congressional and other-wise) to be conducted topublicly establish the factssurrounding one of the mostwidespread medical crimesin the history of mankind,with the intention to holdthe perpetrators accountablefor their despicable betrayalof public trust.

Sincerely,Tina J. GarciaFounder, LEAP Arizona

waking up the nation, one reader at a time · 2020. 4. 2. · waking up the nation, ... someone...

Documents