Petition update

Collusion to Control the Narrative (Part 3)

Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH, United States

Oct 18, 2017 — The following email thread is the latest in a series to expose the editorial control of what is published regarding Lyme disease. Please feel free to write your own letter of concern as the truth about Lyme and its life-altering/life-threatening consequences are kept well hidden from the medical community and general public. (Editorial censorship of the facts/truth)

This editorial censorship is scientific misconduct and fraud as the severity of Lyme disease is downplayed while persistent infection and seronegative disease is ignored.

This thirty year bias against persistent infection is toxic to the advancement of science as more of the population becomes severely disabled from persistent Lyme disease; a growing 21st Century worldwide plague. At what point in time do we recognize that we are dealing with an antibiotic resistant/tolerant superbug and focus our research on finding new antimicrobials for this life-altering/life-threatening disease?

Contact information:

Jane Grochowski, Senior Publisher
J.Grochowski@Elsevier.com

Iratxe Puebla, COPE Complaints Administrator
cope_assistant@publicationethics.org

Erik Engstrom, (BOARD OF DIRECTORS) Chief Executive Officer of RELX Group
https://www.relx.com/investors/corporate-governance/board-of-directors
erik.engstrom@relx.com

Latest letter to the Committee on Publication Ethics:
______________________________________________________________

On Oct 17, 2017 Iratxe Puebla wrote: “As we indicated in earlier correspondence, COPE is a membership organisation and it does not have regulatory powers. It is not within COPE’s scope in the context of review of complaints to comment on the scientific content of specific articles or on individual editorial decisions.”


Dear Ms. Puebla,

It would appear that the Committee on Publication Ethics is little more than a “window dressing” organization.

I noticed that you carbon copied Attorney Mary Alice Moore Leonhardt so perhaps what we have here is a legal issue?

I believe, as do many others that the commentary published in the American Journal of Medicine is a case of aggravated deceit; the authors of the commentary compare Lyme disease to the aches and pains of daily living and claim everyone will test positive.

The rejection of my letter to the editor is a case of collusion to hide the facts behind a disease capable of destroying lives as identified (With references) in the attached letter to the Director of the US Centers for Disease Control. In addition, my letter highlights the serious limitations of the only FDA approved laboratory testing algorithm for Lyme disease. I would like to point out that a recent ABC News report announced that the “CDC advises you may need multiple Lyme disease tests after a tick bite:”

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/cdc-advises-multiple-lyme-disease-tests-tick-bite-48364357

You should also be aware of the following:

Human Rights Violations of Relapsing Fever and Lyme Disease Patients Under International Investigation (United Nations Human Rights Council)
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/human-rights-violations-relapsing-fever-lyme-disease-luche-thayer/

Controlling the narrative through editorial censorship is a case of fraud.

On Oct 17, 2017 Iratxe Puebla wrote: “We view the editor’s determination as falling within the remit of editorial decision making.”

So it would appear that the Committee on Publication Ethics sanctions this case of collusion to control the narrative.

The three authors of the commentary have spent their careers discrediting the sick and disabled while controlling the narrative to insure that Lyme disease remains a low-risk and non-urgent health issue. This thirty year deception/travesty has misguided a worldwide medical community into not taking this infection seriously as the attached caricature depicts.

What we have here is a life-altering/life-threatening infection destroying millions of lives worldwide. It is the 21st Century Plague miscategorized as a simple “nuisance disease” and faulty/misleading antibody tests are the root cause of unimaginable pain and suffering.

Ms. Grochowski,

I want to reiterate that I remain steadfast in my observation of collusion to control the narrative. Ms. Puebla’s reply does not in any way absolve your duty to provide an escalation process for my serious complaint.

Proposed solutions:

1. Retract the commentary in its entirety.

2. Publish my letter to the editor without any deletions/edits.

As Senior Publisher you should be writing a stern letter to Alpert and the three authors of that biased commentary stating that scientific misconduct to support one’s bias will not be tolerated.

Sincerely,

Carl Tuttle
Independent Researcher
Lyme Endemic Hudson, NH USA
Reviewer, American Journal of Infectious Diseases

Cc: Erik Engstrom, (BOARD OF DIRECTORS) Chief Executive Officer of RELX Group
https://www.relx.com/investors/corporate-governance/board-of-directors

ATTACHMENTS:

Letter to the Director of the US Centers for Disease Control
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xaul84dqmqgbre0/Brenda%20Fitzgerald%20MD%20Director%20CDC.docx?dl=0

Lyme caricature sketch
https://www.dropbox.com/s/dljlsmjbvk2trur/lyme%20toon.JPG?dl=0

___________________________________________________________

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Iratxe Puebla
To: Carl Tuttle
Cc: ma@mooreleonhardt.com, J Grochowski
Date: October 17, 2017 at 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: Formal complaint against the American Journal of Medicine

Dear Mr Tuttle,

Thank you for your recent emails regarding your submission to The American Journal of Medicine.

As we indicated in earlier correspondence, COPE is a membership organisation and it does not have regulatory powers. It is not within COPE’s scope in the context of review of complaints to comment on the scientific content of specific articles or on individual editorial decisions.

We understand that the latest concerns you have raised relate to the rejection of your Letter to the Editor submission. We view the editor’s determination as falling within the remit of editorial decision making. COPE cannot interfere with individual editorial decisions and as a result, we consider that this case falls beyond the scope of what COPE can comment on as part of our evaluation of complaints. As a result, we cannot pursue this matter.

Thank you for bringing this matter to the attention of COPE.

With best wishes,

Iratxe
Iratxe Puebla
COPE Complaints Administrator
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
www.publicationethics.org

Registered charity No 1123023
Registered in England and Wales, Company No 6389120
Registered office: COPE, 22 Nelson Close, Harleston, Norfolk IP20 9HL, UK

________________________________________________

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Carl Tuttle wrote:

Dear Ms. Puebla,

Once again I find the need to call to your attention that my latest complaint has been ignored.

Ms. Grochowski is non-compliant with the Committee on Publication Ethics Code of Conduct For Journal Publishers.

My complaint of misconduct/questionable behavior requires a response.

Sincerely,

-Carl Tuttle


Keep fighting for people power!

Politicians and rich CEOs shouldn't make all the decisions. Today we ask you to help keep Change.org free and independent. Our job as a public benefit company is to help petitions like this one fight back and get heard. If everyone who saw this chipped in monthly we'd secure Change.org's future today. Help us hold the powerful to account. Can you spare a minute to become a member today?

I'll power Change with $5 monthlyPayment method

Discussion

Please enter a comment.

We were unable to post your comment. Please try again.