Charge One: Falsifying the case definition- a CDC Staff Conspiracy; Steere, Barbour, and Johnson
A) CDC officers Allen Steere, Alan Barbour, and Barbara Johnson conspired to falsify the case definition for Lyme. [Conspiracy to Defraud, see the ALDF.com as “Astroturf” or a fake non-profit.]
B) Barbour and Johnson own patents from which they stood to profit only if the testing case definition was falsified. [Theft of Honest Services.]C) Steere falsified the Western Blot case definition panel of antibodies testing in Europe in 1992 via research fraud, leaving OspA and B out of the diagnostic standard using recombinant antigens and high-passage strains that drop plasmids. This would give the appearance that OspA and B (encoded on the same plasmid so they would have to be dropped together) were not “primary, immunodominant antigens” which was contrary to Steere, et al’s previous claims and the very nature of their alphanumeric nomenclature (“OspA, OspB, OspC, OspD, OspE, OspF, etc” -antigens).
C) Steere falsified the Western Blot case definition panel of antibodies testing in Europe in 1992 via research fraud, leaving OspA and B out of the diagnostic standard using recombinant antigens and high-passage strains that drop plasmids. This would give the appearance that OspA and B (encoded on the same plasmid so they would have to be dropped together) were not “primary, immunodominant antigens” which was contrary to Steere, et al’s previous claims and the very nature of their alphanumeric nomenclature (“OspA, OspB, OspC, OspD, OspE, OspF, etc” -antigens).
Steere, allegedly, stood to profit with the secondary outcome of falsified testing – testing with a method that was designed by Steere (in Europe) that would be necessary after an OspA vaccine was on the market. It left OspA and B out. OspA and B are encoded on the same plasmid. Steere’s friends’ companies were to be the only ones licensed to use this method.
Steere was involved in a monopoly with RICO entities David Persing (Mayo Clinic and Corixa), Robert Schoen (Yale’s L2 Diagnostics), and Phillip Molloy (Imugen) to capture all the post-LYMErix testing for North America. They publicly claimed in an SEC filing and in public announcements/advertisements that they would be the only labs licensed to test for Lyme “when the vaccination status of the population was unknown” (US patent 6, 045,804), or if it was unknown if a person had had an OspA vaccine or not. [False Claims, Racketeering]
Charge Two: Steere added an unnecessary ELISA screening test that only detects late Lyme arthritis in the first step and declared this to be a test for “early Lyme.”
Steere not only added an ELISA as a screening test that of (falsely raising the bar on a total-antibody test) that left out all neurologic outcomes of Lyme as “cases,” but the normal cut-off for a chromatography assay such as this is 3 standard deviations above baseline noise (that means the signal generated by a blank). Steere used 5 standard deviations for a cut-off – another act of fraud. It was never necessary to use a total-antibody test such as an ELISA since Steere himself knew many patients produced low antibody concentrations, having used the Dattwyler-Halperin Seronegative T cell Proliferation Assay to assess “Chronic Lyme” victims in 1990.
Charge Three: CDC officer Barbara Johnson hosted a fake consensus conference in Dearborn, MI, in October, 1994, subsequent to Steere falsifying the testing in Europe with Frank Dressler (a student in Germany).
Johnson sent out invitations to labs across the country that gave the impression the conference would be about standardization of the METHOD of Western Blotting (e.g., what concentration of reagents and strains to use) rather than the interpretation of the Western Blots. Only MarDx agreed with the antibody panel proposed by Steere from his European research fraud criteria, but they, MarDx, had been given Lyme-arthritis-positive blood (HLA-linked hypersensitivity response) to qualify their Western Blot test strips. The average assessment of the ACCURACY (cases that were known to be positive with, for example a DNA method), excluding MarDx, that were shown to be positive with this falsified antibody panel for a “case” of Lyme was 15%. Johnson ignored all those recommendations, despite inviting them to “participate in the proceedings.”
Charge Four: Falsifying the OspA vaccines outcomes:
This gang then reported 76% and 92% “safe and effective” OspA vaccines (ImuLyme and LYMErix) when the Western Blots, they later reported, were unreadable. So, they used a bogus test, the Dearborn Method (they claimed), to assess the outcomes of their vaccines, but they later reported they actually had no idea if OspA vaccines prevented Lyme because they could not read their results.
Charge Five: Issuing “Guidelines” to have it appear they believed Dearborn and the vaccines scam were not fraud
Klempner, the Valid Biomarkers of Illness vs IDSA’s “Guidelines.”
The IDSA “guidelines” on the “diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease” are based on a 1997-2001 “study” by Mark Klempner, and are meant to reinforce the false notion that IDSA thinks Dearborn is valid, as a sort of a “A Good Offense is the Best Defense” maneuver.
A) Klempner used the Dearborn case definition as a case definition.
B) He conducted this so called study in the first place after publishing that Lyme was incurable with ceftriaxone even when the spirochetes had no host cells to hide within (1992).
C) Klempner allegedly “re-treated” patients IV ceftriaxone for 30 days, when 2/3rds of his victims had never had the standard of care 30 days of IV ceftriaone for this known meningitis in the first place.
D) Klempner is the author of at least one valid biomarker of central nervous system degradation (MMP-130, 1992), yet he used invalid check lists used for psychiatric patients to assess his non-re-treatment outcomes.
Note – Senator Richard Blumenthal admonished IDSA in his lawsuit for a similar instance where JJ Halperin tried to pull an “end-run” around the Blumenthal subpoena, issuing as second set of false guidelines:http://www.ct.gov/ag/cwp/view.asp?a=2795&q=414284
”The IDSA portrayed another medical association’s Lyme disease guidelines as corroborating its own when it knew that the two panels shared several authors, including the chairmen of both groups, and were working on guidelines at the same time. In allowing its panelists to serve on both groups at the same time, IDSA violated its own conflicts of interest policy.”
Charge Six: Intent to Cause Harm with slander, libel and perjury.
This gang trashed the reputations of their Lyme and LYMErix victims implying they were crazy; the UN complaint is referenced: http://www.actionlyme.org/UN_PETITION.htm
Charge Seven: The Patents show contradictory claims to public claims made by the cabal; each claim should be examined and be compared to each Defendants public claims about “Lyme Disease.”
The patents make contradictory claims to what is said publicly about Lyme disease. What’s in them are point by point fraud indictments; Lyme is very serious and incurable; OspA and B were left out of the standard to serve a monopoly on testing after an OspA vaccine was on the market; Barbour owns Edwin Master’s Southern Lyme Disease borrelia; LYMErix or OspA was never a vaccine (Persing).
Charge Eight: The DNA/RNA Shell Game – when looking for spirochetes in humans, they use the wrong DNA. When looking for organisms to patent by patenting their specific flagellin gene, they know how to find Borreliae. http://www.actionlyme.org/PRIMERSHELLGAME.htm
Charge Nine: Congenital Lyme; Yale staff wrote at least 3 reports on congenital Lyme in autopsy findings and re Maternal antibodies. Later, Eugene Shapiro said publicly that there never was a known case of congenital Lyme in the Under Our Skin movie:
Charge Ten: Pediatric Assault with a fake vaccine- UConn and Yale. Testing a known fake vaccine on Czech children, knowing there was none of that kind of OspA in Europe just to see how serious would be the adverse events. This is technically known as “assault.”
Categories: Activism, Immunosuppression Diseases, Lyme Disease