Please see Dr Lee’s response below regarding “inconsistent results” claimed by the CDC for the novel Borrelia Dr Lee isolated in the serum sample of patient #9. The CDC seems to have a track record of denouncing laboratory testing that could challenge the existing dogma as we have seen previously with Advanced Laboratory Services Lyme culture test. New CDC/FDA Warning Against Unapproved Lyme Culture Test http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823840 Current FDA approved Lyme disease tests (Antibody tests) cannot be used to gauge treatment failure or success which is ideal for concealing an antibiotic resistant/tolerant superbug allowing the thirty year old dogma to remain intact. Culture along with DNA sequencing has the potential to identify persistent infection which the CDC appears to be avoiding at all costs. Instead of condemning these lab tests wouldn’t it make sense for the CDC to collaborate with these manufacturers to provide proficiency testing and work out any discrepancies identified? Why is this not happening? Dr Lee’s letter to CDC Director, Dr Beth Bell: ________________________________________ From: "Sin Hang Lee" To: bzb8@cdc.gov Cc: runagain@comcast.net Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 9:48:02 AM Subject: Please point out inconsistent results Dr Beth P Bell Director The National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) bzb8@cdc.gov cc: Carl Tuttle runagain@comcast.net March 13,2016 Dear Dr Bell: In answering a question from Mr Tuttle concerning a publication in which I am the first author [1], you made an allegation “that the authors of this publication reported inconsistent results for this specimen…..” as a reason for the CDC’s inaction to investigate a novel borrelial infection in Hudson Valley. See Mr Tuttle’s post regarding Patient #9 here: Part 2: New species of Borrellia in the Hudson Valley, NY area? https://www.change.org/p/the-us-senate-calling-for-a-congressional-investigation-of-the-cdc-idsa-and-aldf/u/15796418 I hereby request that you point out the “inconsistent results” in the publication referenced above so that the authors can defend their data presented in a peer-reviewed article. An allegation of this nature and magnitude made by the Director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID) carries serious implications which will invariably damage the reputation and credibility of the authors of the publication. If you cannot point out the “inconsistent results” for an open debate, I will question your motives in making such remarks in the first place since your allegation is not based on facts and is now being circulated in the public domain. The authors of the above referenced article [1] performed a series of tests with the support of Dr Marty Schriefer and Dr Claudia Molins of the NCEZID for the purpose of evaluating the accuracy of a new diagnostic test for Lyme disease, utilizing the classic nested PCR and DNA sequencing technology. An official report on this case was submitted to the CDC on September 4, 2013 under a Material Transfer Agreement (NCEZID-R137154-00) authorized by you. Neither you nor any CDC staff members have raised any issue of “inconsistent results” regarding the finding of this novel borrelia. You have an obligation to point out these newly found “inconsistent results” in this article [1] which had undergone two rounds of peer review by 3 experts in the field before acceptance for publication. Sincerely, Sin Hang Lee, MD Shlee01@snet.net Reference [1] Lee SH, Vigliotti JS, Vigliotti VS, Jones W, Shearer DM. Detection of Borreliae in Archived Sera from Patients with Clinically Suspect Lyme Disease. Inter J Mol Sci. 2014; 15:4284-4298.