Please see the email below for a copy of Laura Hovind’s testimony and supporting references from Dr. Richard Horowitz who has treated over 12,000 chronic Lyme patients.
I support Laura’s work and believe evidence of a crime has surfaced in our last Lyme Disease Study Commission meeting. I will follow-up with my testimony tomorrow as Change.org only allows one update in a 24hr period.
Laura flew up from Kansas to Logan Airport in Boston to testify on Monday despite Tropical Storm Henri. Please consider a tax-deductible donation to help cover expenses as her organization is a registered 501(c)3 nonprofit:
Donate to TruthCures Inc.
---------- Original Message ----------
From: CARL TUTTLE <runagain@comcast.net>
To: Leah Cushman <Leah.Cushman@leg.state.nh.us>, Jerry Knirk Jerry.Knirk@leg.state.nh.us
Cc: All members of the Lyme Disease Study Commission
Date: 08/24/2021 9:06 AM
Subject: Monday morning meeting Aug 23rd Testimony from Laura Hovind
To members of the Lyme Disease Study Commission,
In reference to yesterday’s onsite meeting at the Legislative Office Building, please see the testimony below and attachment from Laura Hovind, Executive Director of TruthCures.
Laura’s attachment: (personal Dropbox storage area) https://www.dropbox.com/s/a1x6lwsktkp3x5w/NH%20Handout.pdf?dl=0
Dr. Richard Horowitz reviewed the attached PDF in a previous communication and agreed with the statement that "the sick people don’t produce antibodies"
Dr. Horowitz provided the following references:
Most chronic Lyme patients I have seen do not have CDC + IgG Western blots. They have positive IgM CDC + Western blots and are not necessarily positive by ELISA. I published these results in a study of 200 chronically ill patients we examined who did dapsone combination therapy in our Precision Medicine papers. Please look at table 2 and Figure 3 in the enclosed publication.
Horowitz, R.I.; Freeman, P.R. Precision Medicine: retrospective chart review and data analysis of 200 patients on dapsone combination therapy for chronic Lyme disease/post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome: part 1. International Journal of General Medicine 2019:12 101–119
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30863136
Horowitz, R.I.; Freeman, P.R. Precision Medicine: The Role of the MSIDS Model in Defining, Diagnosing, and Treating Chronic Lyme Disease/Post Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome and Other Chronic Illness: Part 2. Healthcare 2018, 6, 129.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30400667
Abstract: http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/6/4/129/
PDF Version: http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/6/4/129/pdf
Johns Hopkins published similar results. The reason for the lack of IgG antibodies in many patients is explained in the paper and reflects prior work by Nicole Baumgarth in mice where when borrelia invaded the lymph nodes, and affected B cell and antibody production. Please see the detailed explanation in the paper in Precision Medicine 2, which shows the immune defects we found in the chronic Lyme population.
Best,
Dr. H
________________________
Laura Hovind’s Aug 23rd testimony:
Thank you, Representative Cushman, for inviting me to speak today. I’m Laura Hovind, Executive Director of TruthCures, the only Lyme disease nonprofit that exists solely to rectify our diagnostic dilemma.
To do so, we start with the CDC’s January 1991 Lyme disease Surveillance summary, which stated:
“Donors who met the Lyme disease case definition were less likely to be seropositive than were donors who did not meet the case definition.” It also described “an association between overall seropositivity and donors with arthritis.” In other words: the sick people don’t produce antibodies, but people with arthritis do.
And that’s exactly what Allen Steere published two years later. According to his data:
71% of patients with Lyme arthritis showed antibody reactivity.
20% of patients with chronic neuro Lyme who never had arthritis showed reactivity.
ZERO patients with EM rash or meningitis showed antibody reactivity.
In 1994 the FDA convened a meeting on behalf of the three pharmaceutical companies with Lyme vaccines in development, to determine whether the case definition was “appropriate” for vaccine trials.
If you’re developing a vaccine and people who meet the case definition are unlikely to be seropositive, how do you determine if your vaccine prevents Lyme disease? Simple. You convince the FDA the case definition must be revised to describe the subset of cases that are more likely to be seropositive. Then, design the diagnostics to detect only those cases.
So they did—despite researchers such as Raymond Dattwyler arguing that “individuals with a poor immune response tend to have worse disease.” Within months, the CDC adopted the testing scheme we’re stuck with to this day: the antibody bingo that excludes the sickest, immune-suppressed patients by requiring two serologic tests and multiple reactive antibodies.
And the reason we can’t end this nightmare of medical abuse and denial of care, is that this diagnostic scheme is used to screen samples for the CDC’s serum repository. All research, all inclusionary/exclusionary criteria, all trials for the last 27 years have been based on the lie that “Lyme disease” equals lots of antibodies and an arthritic knee. No new diagnostic test can be approved unless it perpetuates the lie.
If we can ever hope to end the suffering, the current, fraudulent Lyme disease case definition must be thrown out and a valid gold standard adopted.
Thank you for your time. I’ve provided a handout with citations for your reference. For additional information, please visit truthcures.org.
TruthCures Inc. is a registered 501(c)3 nonprofit organization dedicated to justice for victims of Lyme disease.
________________________________________
Submitted for the record of the New Hampshire Lyme Study Commission.
Please upload this email and attachment to the Committee's web page.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/statstudcomm/committees/1515/
Carl Tuttle
Hudson, NH