Re: CDC appears to promotes Spread of Lyme Disease

Allow me to be clear regarding the CDC (below article):

First:
CT ATTORNEY GENERAL RICHARD BLUMENTHAL at the May 7, 2005 Lyme
conference:
http://autoimmunityresearch.or­g/photos/blumenthal.ram
(He knows the testing for Lyme is "bogus.")

1) I don't think that the CDC promotes the spread of Lyme, I just
think
it's clear that the CDC is about health information spin, primarily.
They clearly approved of a bogus Lyme vaccine.

CDC's Barbara Johnson in Ft. Collins, CO, refused to speak to me on
the phone. She's the one who recommended not using strain G39/40 at
Dearborn, which is the CDC's Dressler/Steere standard's primary strain,

from which Steere developed the bogus CDC standard.

2) If CDC's response is to get some under-informed NY Times writer to
respin their spin, then that's all the proof anyone needs that we are
right about the CDC's intent.

3) People can read for themselves.
Here is Gary Wormser (ALDF.com)
recommending using Western Blots on ELISA negatives:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=8308100

CDC says the opposite.

4) Here is the CDC link that goes with the below summary of the Jan
29, 2004
Blumenthal Lyme hearing:
http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t040129.html
Note that that is *not* on the CDC's website..
http://www.cslib.org/attygenl/

They don't approve of anyone being treated for Lyme, that's the key
issue. No diagnosis, no treatment.

5) I think it's hilarious that no one sees Allen Steere for the fool
that he is.
There has
been no "autoimmunity" proven. Just perhaps a hypersensitivity
reaction
(allergy)
to OspA, or immune system "priming," as Denise Huber at Tufts described
it.
Yet it is the vaccine.

6) Instead Steere gets an "Astute Clinician award" from the NIH.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=Steere+Astute+Clinician+Award&btnG=Search
with 6 carloads of federal police...
http://www.centurytel.net/tjs11/bug/r8.htm (LOL)

So, here's our "threat" to and "stalking" of CDC/Allen Steere:
----------------------------------------------------------
From: "brent" <borgersbr...@xxxxxxxxx>
Newsgroups: sci.med.diseases.lyme

Subject: CDC appears to promote Spread of Lyme Disease

Date: 7 Jul 2005 10:30:32 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 210
Message-ID: <1120757432.424715.20220@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.2.105.167
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1120757438 29180 127.0.0.1 (7 Jul 2005
17:30:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@xxxxxxxxxx
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:30:38 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@xxxxxxxxxx
Injection-Info: g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=64.2.105.167;
posting-account=-LiVfA0AAACycSG3ZvUxT6zIoBfAEoy_

Posted before I know but I reread it and still cannot fathom how the
CDC gets away with it.
Does anyone know about the May 7 meeting?
This sure as hell sounds RICO to me.
Putting out blatantly false information for the profit of others
resulting in the misdiagnoses of millions. Truly some horrific stuff.


CDC appears to promotes Spread
of Lyme Disease
By Marjorie Tietjen
Director For Lyme Disease Concerns
Common Cause Medical Research Foundation
Daystar1...@xxxxxxxxx
5-3-5

It certainly appears that The Centers For Disease Control (CDC) is
encouraging the spread of Lyme Disease (borrelia burgdorferi) and other
chronic illnesses, which may be caused by various strains of
spirochetes currently not being tested for.

To begin with the CDC states that Lyme Disease is a clinical diagnosis.
This means that when determining whether a patient may or may not have
lyme disease, the physician must consider the extensive array of
symptoms which present in lyme disease and the history of the patient..
Medical tests should only be used as an adjunct or aid in this
determination.

The CDC uses specific criteria for interpreting the Western Blot in
regards to Lyme Disease. The CDC states somewhere in their fine print
that their very restrictive criteria is only to be used for
surveillance purposes and not for patient diagnosis. However , this
crucial fact is not made clear to the health departments, laboratories
or doctors. As a result thousands... perhaps even millions of people
with chronic illness are being misdiagnosed and left untreated.

In February of 2004 Connecticut held a hearing which addressed this
issue. Attorney General Blumenthal requested that Yale, the National
Institute of Health (NIH) and the CDC attend the Hearing. All three
institutions declined the invitation. We then sought the aid of our
congressmen who did end up convincing the CDC to attend. One of the
main forces behind the non treatment of Lyme is Yale's stance that 3 to
4 weeks of antibiotic treatment is almost always sufficient to produce
a cure. Certain doctors at Yale contend that after the 30 day treatment
period, if one still has the exact same symptoms, it is no longer
active chronic lyme but is now suddenly an autoimmune disorder.

They have no proof to back this up and this was made evident when they
did testify at our first Lyme hearing several years back. Perhaps this
is why they were reluctant to attend our most recent Hearing. Many
patients who go to Yale for help with suspected lyme are being
diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue
syndrome, ALS and even Lupus. Yale evidently feels there is no such
thing as chronic active Lyme Disease.

The main focus of the Hearing last year was to educate the medical
community as to the extensive problem of lyme being misdiagnosed as
many other diseases and conditions. One of the prime reasons for this
medical disaster is that doctors are placing too much reliance on the
two recommended lyme tests, the Elisa and the Western Blot. At our
Hearing Attorney General Blumenthal strongly advised the CDC to alert
the health departments, laboratories and doctors not to use the over
restrictive criteria, involving the Western Blot, for diagnosing Lyme
Disease. Again..... this is one of the main factors as to why so many
people are not being properly diagnosed and as a result are becoming
disabled and some are even dying. You may not hear of people dying from
lyme disease. Usually you will be told that death was from a heart
attack or some other end result of the Lyme Disease process. Scientists
are just beginning to realize the extensive nature of this disease and
it's coinfections.

It has been a year now since the Hearing and we've been waiting for the
CDC to correct this unnecessary situation. Instead of backing up their
original statement not to use CDC criteria for diagnostic purposes,
they have diverted the public's attention from that issue by coming up
with a different angle.

I was directed to the CDC website On April 3, 2005 there were two new
highlights posted. One was entitled "Caution Regarding Testing for Lyme
Disease" and the second one was "Information About Lyme Disease on the
Internet". The impression left by these articles is that only
government websites or those websites who are partially sponsored or
affiliated with certain government agencies, have the correct
information concerning Lyme Disease. As far as testing goes, it appears
that the tests which are finding an extensive amount of lyme in the
population ,are the very ones the CDC is claiming are inaccurate.

The particular tests which the CDC is discouraging the use of are the
urine antigen test, the polymerase chain reaction tests and the immune
fluorescent staining for cell wall deficient forms of Borrelia
burgdorferi (lyme). On the whole patients have had very positive
results using tests of this sort as a basis, along with clinical
judgment, for antibiotic treatment. There have been many very ill
patients who have tested negative on CDC approved tests, went on to be
further tested by these other methods, were found to be positive, and
then improved on antibiotics. It is ironic that the CDC is throwing a
negative light on the very tests which appear to be saving people's
lives.

Antibody tests have limited usefulness, especially in chronic Lyme
Disease. The following is a very important list from Dr. Robert
Bransfield's website
http://www.mentalhealthandillness.com/seronegativelymedisease.html.

It shows the many reasons why a patient can test negative on these CDC
approved tests and still have Lyme Disease. It would be an excellent
list to take with you when visiting your doctor. After looking over
this list one can see why depending on antibody testing for a diagnosis
can be very risky business. Why then would the CDC encourage us to
depend on the antibody tests to diagnose Lyme Disease? Why are they
discouraging the use of the very tests that have already helped
countless patients access treatment and as a result gain concrete
improvement?


The specific tests and the order of testing, which the CDC suggests,
results in vast underdiagnosis. Is this the goal? Could it be possible
that the CDC is intricately meshed with the pharmaceutical companies?
Is a treatable epidemic being covered up for the purpose of financial
gain? When a patient is handed a negative diagnosis for Lyme Disease
they proceed to visit specialist after specialist seeking a diagnosis.
This results in multiple isolated diagnoses, such as irritable bowel
syndrome, carpal tunnel, migraine headaches, fatigue, depression, ADD,
eye problems, heart problems, foot and leg pain, etc. Lyme Disease can
present with 40 or more symptoms throughout the body.

It becomes obvious that marketing many symptomatic treatments is much
more profitable than promoting one which cures. What are the real
causes of our ever expanding list of chronic illnesses and conditions
which have no definitive tests, causes or cures? Microbes and chemicals
in our food and environment obviously are playing a much larger role
than is being admitted by the government agencies who are supposedly
responsible for our health.

I would like to speak a bit more concerning the article on the CDC's
website "Inaccurate Information About Lyme Disease on the Internet" by
James D. Cooper M.D.. and Henry Feder Jr. M.D. The basis of the article
is to shed suspicion and doubt concerning any lyme disease information
we find on the internet that isn't sponsored or approved by the
government. According to this article only government research or
approved research is valid. Evidently the government and or mainstream
medicine discounts any empirical evidence gained through hands on
experience in treating chronic active lyme.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the CDC have no
treatment protocols for chronic lyme because they state there is no
such thing as persistent infection. I challenge them to provide proof
to back up this statement. In fact, The Greater Hartford Lyme Disease
Action and Support Group is posting a 10, 000 dollar reward to any
doctor or researcher who can prove beyond a doubt that lyme disease
cannot be a persistent infection... that it is absolutely cured and
totally eradicated from the body with 6 weeks of antibiotic treatment.
There are many articles, studies and personal experiences which prove
that lyme can be a persistent infection despite long term antibiotic
treatment. To check out some of the articles and studies which back up
the chronic persistent infection stance... please visit
http://www.lymeinfo.net/medical/LDPersist.pdf

There are a couple of other points I would like to address. The CDC
recommends one dose of 200mg of doxycycline as prophylaxis
(preventative measure) when bitten by a tick. In their view this is
supposed to be sufficient. I am a personal witness to the fact that
this is not always sufficient. I have a friend who was bitten by a
tick. The tick was removed and 100mg of doxycycline was taken
immediately, twice a day for 30 days. The day after the medication was
stopped, this person presented with multiple lyme rashes all over their
body, suggesting a systemic infection. When tested this person was CDC
positive. So, not only is one dose not always enough, but in this case
30 days was not enough!

The article by Cooper and Feder also states that "Lyme Disease has
never been passed in breast milk to an infant." (American Academy of
Pediatrics). How can a sweeping statement like this be credibly made?
To begin with there are studies out there that have shown Bb to be
present in breast milk...... and a study from Diagnostic Microbiology
and Infectious Disease vol. 21, Issue 3 March 1995, page 121-128
entitled "Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi DNA by polymerase chain
reaction in the urine and breast milk of patients with Lyme". The CDC
may then tell us that this does not prove that it can be passed on to
the infant. This may be true but testing is so inaccurate that this
statement cannot be proven. It would also be helpful when evaluating
this statement, to know what percentage of the nursing population, and
their infants, have been tested for lyme. Studies with animals have
shown that the organism has been transmitted to infant mice through
breast milk.

Independent researchers and lyme literate doctors who are presented day
after day with cause and effect evidence involving thousands of
patients have no doubts in their minds that Lyme Disease and some of
it's coinfections can be chronic. Why is this empirical evidence being
discounted and covered up? Why are doctors being persecuted for curing
and or improving their patients with long term antibiotics?

On May 7, in Connecticut, the Greater Hartford Lyme Disease Support and
Action Group is holding a conference you do not want to miss. If you
have any loved ones or know any friends with disease conditions such as
ALS, M.S, Lupus, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, ADD, OCD,
Autism, Bi Polar Depression, Alzheimer's, etc, please encourage them to
come to this conference. The misdiagnoses concerning these diseases are
staggering. This conference is featuring highly respected researchers
from across the country who will be addressing these issues. and how
that many times Lyme disease plays a role in these diseases. For more
information you can e-mail me at daystar1...@xxxxxxxxx

Let's all come together and make a difference. Much of the chronic
illness in our country is tragic and unnecessary. We need to take back
responsibility for our own healthcare.

http://health.benabraham.com/html/cdc_cares_about_lyme_disease_.html




Google Home - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs, Press, & Help





> inline textas attachment Select Folder
Trash
Previous | Next | Back to INBOX




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2005 EarthLink, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Members and visitors to the EarthLink Web site agree to abide by our
Policies and Agreements
EarthLink Privacy Policy



brent wrote:
> Posted before I know but I reread it and still cannot fathom how the
> CDC gets away with it.
> Does anyone know about the May 7 meeting?
> This sure as hell sounds RICO to me.
> Putting out blatantly false information for the profit of others
> resulting in the misdiagnoses of millions. Truly some horrific stuff.
>
>
> CDC appears to promotes Spread
> of Lyme Disease
> By Marjorie Tietjen
> Director For Lyme Disease Concerns
> Common Cause Medical Research Foundation
> Daystar1952@xxxxxxxxx
> 5-3-5
>
> It certainly appears that The Centers For Disease Control (CDC) is
> encouraging the spread of Lyme Disease (borrelia burgdorferi) and other
> chronic illnesses, which may be caused by various strains of
> spirochetes currently not being tested for.
>
> To begin with the CDC states that Lyme Disease is a clinical diagnosis.
> This means that when determining whether a patient may or may not have
> lyme disease, the physician must consider the extensive array of
> symptoms which present in lyme disease and the history of the patient..
> Medical tests should only be used as an adjunct or aid in this
> determination.
>
> The CDC uses specific criteria for interpreting the Western Blot in
> regards to Lyme Disease. The CDC states somewhere in their fine print
> that their very restrictive criteria is only to be used for
> surveillance purposes and not for patient diagnosis. However , this
> crucial fact is not made clear to the health departments, laboratories
> or doctors. As a result thousands... perhaps even millions of people
> with chronic illness are being misdiagnosed and left untreated.
>
> In February of 2004 Connecticut held a hearing which addressed this
> issue. Attorney General Blumenthal requested that Yale, the National
> Institute of Health (NIH) and the CDC attend the Hearing. All three
> institutions declined the invitation. We then sought the aid of our
> congressmen who did end up convincing the CDC to attend. One of the
> main forces behind the non treatment of Lyme is Yale's stance that 3 to
> 4 weeks of antibiotic treatment is almost always sufficient to produce
> a cure. Certain doctors at Yale contend that after the 30 day treatment
> period, if one still has the exact same symptoms, it is no longer
> active chronic lyme but is now suddenly an autoimmune disorder.
>
> They have no proof to back this up and this was made evident when they
> did testify at our first Lyme hearing several years back. Perhaps this
> is why they were reluctant to attend our most recent Hearing. Many
> patients who go to Yale for help with suspected lyme are being
> diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue
> syndrome, ALS and even Lupus. Yale evidently feels there is no such
> thing as chronic active Lyme Disease.
>
> The main focus of the Hearing last year was to educate the medical
> community as to the extensive problem of lyme being misdiagnosed as
> many other diseases and conditions. One of the prime reasons for this
> medical disaster is that doctors are placing too much reliance on the
> two recommended lyme tests, the Elisa and the Western Blot. At our
> Hearing Attorney General Blumenthal strongly advised the CDC to alert
> the health departments, laboratories and doctors not to use the over
> restrictive criteria, involving the Western Blot, for diagnosing Lyme
> Disease. Again..... this is one of the main factors as to why so many
> people are not being properly diagnosed and as a result are becoming
> disabled and some are even dying. You may not hear of people dying from
> lyme disease. Usually you will be told that death was from a heart
> attack or some other end result of the Lyme Disease process. Scientists
> are just beginning to realize the extensive nature of this disease and
> it's coinfections.
>
> It has been a year now since the Hearing and we've been waiting for the
> CDC to correct this unnecessary situation. Instead of backing up their
> original statement not to use CDC criteria for diagnostic purposes,
> they have diverted the public's attention from that issue by coming up
> with a different angle.
>
> I was directed to the CDC website On April 3, 2005 there were two new
> highlights posted. One was entitled "Caution Regarding Testing for Lyme
> Disease" and the second one was "Information About Lyme Disease on the
> Internet". The impression left by these articles is that only
> government websites or those websites who are partially sponsored or
> affiliated with certain government agencies, have the correct
> information concerning Lyme Disease. As far as testing goes, it appears
> that the tests which are finding an extensive amount of lyme in the
> population ,are the very ones the CDC is claiming are inaccurate.
>
> The particular tests which the CDC is discouraging the use of are the
> urine antigen test, the polymerase chain reaction tests and the immune
> fluorescent staining for cell wall deficient forms of Borrelia
> burgdorferi (lyme). On the whole patients have had very positive
> results using tests of this sort as a basis, along with clinical
> judgment, for antibiotic treatment. There have been many very ill
> patients who have tested negative on CDC approved tests, went on to be
> further tested by these other methods, were found to be positive, and
> then improved on antibiotics. It is ironic that the CDC is throwing a
> negative light on the very tests which appear to be saving people's
> lives.
>
> Antibody tests have limited usefulness, especially in chronic Lyme
> Disease. The following is a very important list from Dr. Robert
> Bransfield's website
> http://www.mentalhealthandillness.com/seronegativelymedisease.html.
>
> It shows the many reasons why a patient can test negative on these CDC
> approved tests and still have Lyme Disease. It would be an excellent
> list to take with you when visiting your doctor. After looking over
> this list one can see why depending on antibody testing for a diagnosis
> can be very risky business. Why then would the CDC encourage us to
> depend on the antibody tests to diagnose Lyme Disease? Why are they
> discouraging the use of the very tests that have already helped
> countless patients access treatment and as a result gain concrete
> improvement?
>
>
> The specific tests and the order of testing, which the CDC suggests,
> results in vast underdiagnosis. Is this the goal? Could it be possible
> that the CDC is intricately meshed with the pharmaceutical companies?
> Is a treatable epidemic being covered up for the purpose of financial
> gain? When a patient is handed a negative diagnosis for Lyme Disease
> they proceed to visit specialist after specialist seeking a diagnosis.
> This results in multiple isolated diagnoses, such as irritable bowel
> syndrome, carpal tunnel, migraine headaches, fatigue, depression, ADD,
> eye problems, heart problems, foot and leg pain, etc. Lyme Disease can
> present with 40 or more symptoms throughout the body.
>
> It becomes obvious that marketing many symptomatic treatments is much
> more profitable than promoting one which cures. What are the real
> causes of our ever expanding list of chronic illnesses and conditions
> which have no definitive tests, causes or cures? Microbes and chemicals
> in our food and environment obviously are playing a much larger role
> than is being admitted by the government agencies who are supposedly
> responsible for our health.
>
> I would like to speak a bit more concerning the article on the CDC's
> website "Inaccurate Information About Lyme Disease on the Internet" by
> James D. Cooper M.D.. and Henry Feder Jr. M.D. The basis of the article
> is to shed suspicion and doubt concerning any lyme disease information
> we find on the internet that isn't sponsored or approved by the
> government. According to this article only government research or
> approved research is valid. Evidently the government and or mainstream
> medicine discounts any empirical evidence gained through hands on
> experience in treating chronic active lyme.
>
> The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the CDC have no
> treatment protocols for chronic lyme because they state there is no
> such thing as persistent infection. I challenge them to provide proof
> to back up this statement. In fact, The Greater Hartford Lyme Disease
> Action and Support Group is posting a 10, 000 dollar reward to any
> doctor or researcher who can prove beyond a doubt that lyme disease
> cannot be a persistent infection... that it is absolutely cured and
> totally eradicated from the body with 6 weeks of antibiotic treatment.
> There are many articles, studies and personal experiences which prove
> that lyme can be a persistent infection despite long term antibiotic
> treatment. To check out some of the articles and studies which back up
> the chronic persistent infection stance... please visit
> http://www.lymeinfo.net/medical/LDPersist.pdf
>
> There are a couple of other points I would like to address. The CDC
> recommends one dose of 200mg of doxycycline as prophylaxis
> (preventative measure) when bitten by a tick. In their view this is
> supposed to be sufficient. I am a personal witness to the fact that
> this is not always sufficient. I have a friend who was bitten by a
> tick. The tick was removed and 100mg of doxycycline was taken
> immediately, twice a day for 30 days. The day after the medication was
> stopped, this person presented with multiple lyme rashes all over their
> body, suggesting a systemic infection. When tested this person was CDC
> positive. So, not only is one dose not always enough, but in this case
> 30 days was not enough!
>
> The article by Cooper and Feder also states that "Lyme Disease has
> never been passed in breast milk to an infant." (American Academy of
> Pediatrics). How can a sweeping statement like this be credibly made?
> To begin with there are studies out there that have shown Bb to be
> present in breast milk...... and a study from Diagnostic Microbiology
> and Infectious Disease vol. 21, Issue 3 March 1995, page 121-128
> entitled "Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi DNA by polymerase chain
> reaction in the urine and breast milk of patients with Lyme". The CDC
> may then tell us that this does not prove that it can be passed on to
> the infant. This may be true but testing is so inaccurate that this
> statement cannot be proven. It would also be helpful when evaluating
> this statement, to know what percentage of the nursing population, and
> their infants, have been tested for lyme. Studies with animals have
> shown that the organism has been transmitted to infant mice through
> breast milk.
>
> Independent researchers and lyme literate doctors who are presented day
> after day with cause and effect evidence involving thousands of
> patients have no doubts in their minds that Lyme Disease and some of
> it's coinfections can be chronic. Why is this empirical evidence being
> discounted and covered up? Why are doctors being persecuted for curing
> and or improving their patients with long term antibiotics?
>
> On May 7, in Connecticut, the Greater Hartford Lyme Disease Support and
> Action Group is holding a conference you do not want to miss. If you
> have any loved ones or know any friends with disease conditions such as
> ALS, M.S, Lupus, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, ADD, OCD,
> Autism, Bi Polar Depression, Alzheimer's, etc, please encourage them to
> come to this conference. The misdiagnoses concerning these diseases are
> staggering. This conference is featuring highly respected researchers
> from across the country who will be addressing these issues. and how
> that many times Lyme disease plays a role in these diseases. For more
> information you can e-mail me at daystar1952@xxxxxxxxx
>
> Let's all come together and make a difference. Much of the chronic
> illness in our country is tragic and unnecessary. We need to take back
> responsibility for our own healthcare.
>
> http://health.benabraham.com/html/cdc_cares_about_lyme_disease_.html

.

Quantcast