CDC's Blatant Lies

Blatant lie (CDC's test is not valid):
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5405a6.htm

"Health-care providers are reminded that a diagnosis of Lyme disease
should be
made after evaluation of a patient's clinical presentation and risk for
exposure
to infected ticks, *and,* if indicated, after the use of validated
laboratory
tests."


There are no validated tests available; CDC's test is impossibly wrong
and could
not be more invalid. Steere found his own IgG method to be 72%
accurate for
Lyme arthritis only and that's what he reported in Dressler-Steere
(39/54
arthritis presenters). In the field, Steere's IgG method ranges from
4%
accuracy (Klempner found 78 out of 1800 patients to be Steere-positive)
to 25%
accuracy for early Lyme (Wormser).

Therefore a 25% maximum accurate test, is not a "validated test."

================

1) At Dearborn, here's what happened (last three pages which FDA put up
out of
order):
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3680s2_11.pdf

2) Matches pretty well with what Igenex said in 1998:
http://www.igenex.com/labtest.htm

3) Dr. Donta suggested that one specific antibody, like OspC should be
diagnostic, and 3/4 of the 4 panel members agreed (I think it was the
2001 LDF
conference, also).

4) Antigens and Steere (IgM is diagnostic of ongoing infection because
Lyme
appears to be a relapsing fever borreliosis and does antigenic
variation, 1986):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3531237&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_docsum

5) Yale attempts to discover if Bb flagellin fragments can be found to
have
specificity (not capture flagellin from other infections):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1894359&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum

They then patent it, making the CLAIM that the test meets all criteria
for
validity [specificity (nearly 100%), early, accurate (17/18)]:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5747294.WKU.&OS=PN/5747294&RS=PN/5747294

Yale did not use this valid test to see if their LYMErix vaccine
prevented Lyme

disease because they knew LYMErix did not prevent Lyme duh.

6) Barbour saying: "Lyme is a relapsing fever organism which does
antigenic
variation (will produce new IgM), like Sleeping Sickness, and it seems
these
tick pathogens have acquired new skills (like Alien), aka 'convergent
evolution:'"

Emerg Infect Dis. 2000 Sep-Oct;6(5):449-57. Related Articles, Links

Antigenic variation in vector-borne pathogens.

Barbour AG, Restrepo BI.

University of California Irvine, Irvine, California 92697-4025,
USA.
abarbour@xxxxxxx

Several pathogens of humans and domestic animals depend on
hematophagous
arthropods to transmit them from one vertebrate reservoir host to
another and
maintain them in an environment. These pathogens use antigenic
variation to
prolong their circulation in the blood and thus increase the likelihood
of
transmission. By convergent evolution, bacterial and protozoal
vector-borne
pathogens have acquired similar genetic mechanisms for successful
antigenic
variation. Borrelia spp. and Anaplasma marginale (among bacteria) and
African
trypanosomes, Plasmodium falciparum, and Babesia bovis (among
parasites) are
examples of pathogens using these mechanisms. Antigenic variation poses
a
challenge in the development of vaccines against vector-borne
pathogens.
PMID: 10998374 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


["Convergent evolution" AKA Bacteriophage vectored lateral gene
transfer. The
Pam3Cys of OspA conformation looks like Lipid A of E. coli, and diacyl
lipopeptides are mycoplasmas' favorite fashion statement. These
surface
antigens are like slyme molecules, which have affinities for certain
tissues,
but also do intercellular damage and suppress the immune system. Some
people
(like Justin Radolf) say certain people can become tolerant to them and
their
HLA molecules become dysfunctional. Other people (like Allen Steere)
say you
don't even have Lyme "disease" unless you have a hyper HLA response
(are
allergic to the Osps). The NIAID people say you don't have a "disease"
unless
you have an inflammatory response.

Borrelia are stealth infections, and usually don't result in a typical
inflammatory response. Their favorite way to do damage is to screw up
the
immune system and just plain be a stealth parasite. Lyme belongs to
the CDC's
parasitic diseases division. But CDC belongs to it's own planet.]

7) Alan Barbour and vlse:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,719,983.WKU.&OS=PN/6,719,983&RS=PN/6,719,983

"2.1 Methods of Treatment

"An important aspect of the invention is the recognition that Borrelia
VMP-like
sequences recombine at the vls site, with the result that *** antigenic

variation is virtually limitless. Multiclonal populations therefore can
exist in
an infected patient so that immunological defenses are severely tested
if not
totally overwhelmed.*** Thus there is now the opportunity to develop
more
effective combinations of immunogens for protection against Borrelia
infections
or as preventive inoculations such as in the form of cocktails of
multiple
antigenic variants based on a base series of combinatorial VMP-like
antigens."



8) The C6 peptide test or the IR test [Invariable Region of the
Variable Major
Surface protein(s)], infers that there exists a variable region, which
results
in new and variable IgM duh.



Therefore, the obvious way to test for Lyme in antibodies is to use
Yale's
validated specific flagellin test and nevermind the other junk, except
for the
other markers of disease and tests for immune suppression results, such
as the
activation of latent infections and mycoplasmal infections, to avert
the
"discovery" that a sick person has been poisoning themselves
(Munchausen's).


If we must use a DNA test, it should not be for any Osps, but for
invariable DNA
like flagellin, or the Wormser method:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=9986813&query_hl=12&itool=pubmed_docsum
or any of the methods that the bad guys use when they really want to
find
Borrelia (good for diagnosing Borreliosis in ticks, just not in
humans?) for
which there are multiple copies per cell.



I hope that clarifies the fact that the CDC is full of E. coli, and
that they
have known damned well how to test for any borreliosis with 94%
accuracy for at
least 14 years.

.

Quantcast