The Conspirators; they own the patents and changed the testing

This is Criminal Charge Sheet One and a Chronology.


You are going to have seen much of this evidence before in other webs and criminal charge sheets created for the USDOJ, broken down into the various main aspects of the crime; Who said what, and where did they say the opposite elsewhere?
Who owns the patents?  Who was at Dearborn?
Who falsified the testing because they knew LYMErix or OspA could never be a vaccine – and caused the exact same disease definition as they one they threw out of the Dearborn case definition?
Who identified all the biomarkers of neurologic disease but who later called us all crazy?
It’s all their own work.  We use their own publications against them.  They can’t then dispute it in a court, or say, “Oh, we got this or that wrong.”
No, they got it ALL wrong after they FIRST had it all RIGHT!
They performed a 180 on every single point.

Repetition is the way right brain damaged people learn.  As most of us know, people with ME/CFS have right brain damage, and so it is difficult to use imagery to help them learn what science demonstrates and validates their terrible post sepsis-illness and disability.  Also to help them fight the same abuses Lyme victims face (by the way, these are all the same disease).  Therefore, I am repetition-ing you with this blog.

Most vector borne disease pathogens such as  Bart, Babs, Spirochetes, mycoplasma, etc., are bearers of fungal antigens like   Therefore, you can’t ever have a vaccine out of any of those antigens.  But these dumbasses – McSweegan, Fish, Weinstein, Schoen, Persing, Shapiro, everyone at Yale, Wormser, Nowakowski, Plotkin, Sepkowitz, Steere, Barbara Johnson, Alan Barbour, Sigal, Zemel, Feder, etc.-, thought TBDs would be a whole new genre of vaccines and THEY were going to get all the royalties.

It was the perfect example of what Churchill said in 1932, in “Fifty Years Hence,” where the technology got ahead of the morality or human cultural advancement.  Coincidentally, 1982 was when Willy Burgdorfer discovered Lyme was caused by a spirochete.

Perfect.  That’s a bullseye, Winston.


The CDC’s Dearborn and Lyme Vaccine Scam; the testing for Lyme disease was falsified to pass off bogus vaccines and test kits – a chronology:

Originally, Lyme borrelia were perceived by the CDC to be just another group of Relapsing Fever organisms.  Borreliae (the whole genus) undergo constant antigenic variation, making vaccines and valid testing impossible except for a flagellin method.  At some point, it was decided by CDC officers that they should commercialize Lyme and other emerging, tick-borne diseases by patenting vaccines and test kits based on recombinant antigens, anyway.  No one knows who gave the CDC the authority to do this, but this decision coincided with the establishment of the fake non-profit, the American Lyme Disease Foundation (, Valhalla, NY, in 1990, by Edward McSweegan, Durland Fish, Gary Wormser, and John J. Connolly, the then-president of New York Medical College in association with Kaiser-Permanente, who are still at NYMC writing MD-training modules.  (CDC is often found in collaboration with Kaiser-Permanente; we knew this even before their “Morgellon’s investigation” scam.)

The is a False Claims-and-Racketeering organization, where the wealthy “sponsors” were apparently given some inside information regarding the companies that would be manufacturing the bogus recombinant vaccines and test kits. Those companies would be given some assurance against the prosecution of the testing scam necessary to pass off these bogus recombinant products. The Defendants, via changing the diagnostic standard, claimed Lyme was not just another Relapsing Fever organism, but some entirely different disease.  Yet, spirochetes were for the last 100+ years known to be permanent brain infections; rodent brains used to be the storage media (Barbour, 1986) before the CDC learned how to freeze-dry spirochetes (1964):

The Defendants even changed the disease’s name to “Lyme disease” from “Lyme borreliosis.”  The participants in the scam even referred to themselves as an “enterprise” (Arthur Weinstein, 1998).

The Defendants conspired to make Lyme disease largely undetectable. The plan was to vaccinate ~5000 people and send them out in the world to see if they got Lyme disease. They then would test the people who became ill, with a test that only detects 15% of the cases. If Lyme disease is only 15% detectable, the Defendants would be guaranteed to have an at least 85% “effective” vaccine.  If they maliciously discredited the people who became ill as a result of the vaccine itself or vaccine failure (Lyme), then the vaccine would be “safe,” too.  We call both the crime of falsifying the testing and the resultant – and current – bogus testing criteria, “Dearborn.”

The problem with this scam was that the vaccine choice, OspA (Pam3Cys or a tri-acylated lipoprotein), was a fungal antigen, a TLR2/1-agonist, and as such caused immunosuppression in humans. It never could have been a vaccine. Shed fungal antigens like OspA were the very things responsible for the New Great Imitator outcomes. In dogs, Gary Wormser saw the same immunosuppression result with an OspA vaccine:

2000, Modulation of lymphocyte proliferative responses by a canine Lyme disease vaccine of recombinant outer surface protein A (OspA).
“OspA interferes with the response of lymphocytes to proliferative stimuli including a blocking of cell cycle phase progression.”

The short version – and even the technical version -, is that OspA or a triacyl lipopeptide or Pam3Cys gums up the immunity-works.



“Changed!!??” Yes, They Changed the Diagnostic Standard for Lyme disease.
The following article by Allen Steere is the foundation of the CDC’s original, 1990, “Lyme disease” “case definition” blood test (serology).  It was later falsified at a farce of a serology conference put on by the CDC in 1994 in Dearborn, MI.

1986, Allen Steere says:
Appearance of a new immunoglobulin M response and expansion of the immunoglobulin G response late in the illness.

“… Using immunoblots, we identified proteins of Borrelia burgdorferi bound by IgM and IgG antibodies during Lyme disease. In 12 patients with early disease alone, both the IgM and IgG responses were restricted primarily to a 41-kD antigen. This limited response disappeared within several months. In contrast, among six patients with prolonged illness, the IgM response to the 41-kD protein sometimes persisted for months to years, and late in the illness during arthritis, a new IgM response sometimes developed to a 34-kD component of the organism. The IgG response in these patients appeared in a characteristic sequential pattern over months to years to as many as 11 spirochetal antigens. The appearance of a new IgM response and the expansion of the IgG response late in the illness, and the lack of such responses in patients with early disease alone, suggest that B. burgdorferi remains alive throughout the illness.”

1990, CDC published this case definition:

“Laboratory criteria for diagnosis
”• Isolation of Borrelia burgdorferi from clinical specimen, or

“• Demonstration of diagnostic levels of IgM and IgG antibodies to the spirochete in serum or CSF, or
”• Significant change in IgM and IgG antibody response to B. burgdorferi in paired acute – and convalescent-phase serum samples.” 

That means Lyme disease should be perceived as a relapsing fever organism, undergoing antigenic variation. Victims are only able to produce new, IgM bands if the organism is still alive and not killed by antibiotics.

Steere also wrote in that same 1986 report (above; basis of the 1990 CDC case definition) that all you need is band 41 to diagnose Lyme; just rule out syphilis. That is important to remember: You only need band 41, or the anti-flagellar antibody and the triad of symptoms to diagnose Lyme with common sense rule-outs. The US patent #5,618,533 of Yale’s is for a specific recombinant fragment of Borrelia burgdorferi flagellin. It is an improvement on the band 41-only antibody test, and is an actual FDA-validation according to the FDA’s criteria for the validation of an analytical method (as shown in the Primers Shell Game criminal charge sheet).

Before a diagnosis of Lyme, and of course in all illnesses, it is recommended to rule out blood cancers. The symptoms of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia are identical to chronic Lyme or MS, not to mention the fact that Lyme and LYMErix both are known to cause cancer (and MS, Lupus, possibly RA) via the reactivation of latent herpes viruses.  Mycoplasma are also known to be associated with the production of cancer. Chronic, late, neurologic Lyme victims are tolerized to these fungal type-, TLR2/1-agonist bearing diseases. The truth about the “New Great Imitator” is that it is these other, secondary, opportunistic herpes viruses and other bacterial/fungal infections are responsible for that variety show of outcomes.  It’s similar to AIDS.  It is Post-Sepsis Syndrome.

This is the current, 1994, CDC falsified, Dearborn case definition: 

“It was recommended that an IgM immunoblot be considered positive if two of the following three bands are present: 24 kDa (OspC)*, 39 kDa (BmpA), and 41 kDa (Fla) (1).
“It was further recommended that an IgG immunoblot be considered positive if five of the following 10 bands are present: 18 kDa, 21 kDa (OspC)*, 28 kDa, 30 kDa, 39 kDa (BmpA), 41 kDa (Fla), 45 kDa, 58 kDa (not GroEL), 66 kDa, and 93 kDa (2).”

This 1994, current, criteria is very different from the 1990 criteria and basically refers to only the late, HLA-linked, arthritis, hypersensitivity response. It came about as a result of research fraud committed by Allen Steere in Europe in 1992.  OspA and B (bands 31 and 34) are notably absent.
As an aside, we can assume that the reason the IDSA/ALDF/CDC/Yale Lyme Defendants do not want anyone treated for Lyme is because late in the disease, it’s really about fungal antigen tolerance and cross tolerance, as well as reactivated herpes viruses, or is NIH’s incurable Post-Sepsis Syndrome.  This outcome is paralleled in many other conditions such as the failed Tuberculosis vaccines, Malaria and Epstein-Barr resulting in Burkitt’s lymphoma, etc.  See more at:

Most recently (March 2015) the IDSA had this to say, confirming our supposition:
“Likewise, the use of broad spectrum gram-negative coverage is not recommended in most common, uncomplicated SSTIs and should be reserved for special populations, such as those with immune compromise.”

Treatment of “Lyme” would allegedly compromise the treatment of severe sepsis infections by creating an environment where those secondary infections acquire antibiotic resistance genes from Lyme victims being treated with the tougher antibiotics.  The truth, however, is that most infectious disease pathogens pick up resistance genes in swine lagoons. Go ahead and look that up in the National Library of Medicine. That should be well known by normal people (excludes the CDC and IDSA).

How Lyme and OspA cause disease we learned from the LYMErix fiasco, because the fungal OspA vaccines caused the same systemic, protean, post-sepsis syndrome, chronic active infections/disease (per Ben Luft and Dave Persing, and the vaccine victims themselves as reported to the FDA through the VAERS; see below for those links and quotes).

First, Lyme was a plain old regular Relapsing Fever organism and the “New Great Imitator!” because it caused ALS, Lupus, MS, Cancer, RA, stroke, etc.
Later, at the same time the crooks had a vaccine candidate in early phase trials (OspA), it became nothing and a non-disease (psychiatric and hysteria, etc., Barbour and Fish, 1993).
We were then about to get “a vaccine for a disease that causes no illness.”

This is still the current position of Yale, CDC, IDSA, and the ALDF/EUCALB: “Lyme patients are not sick, and OspA is a vaccine.” likes to say what diseases are-not, but they never say what diseases are.
MD-America does not even notice that the CDC and IDSA are insane, even after the FDA ordered LYMErix off the market in February 2002, after Senator Richard Blumenthal (a former USDOJ prosecutor) sued them for Anti-Trust, after Edward McSweegan became America’s infamous NIH employee as America’s one and only “Man With No Work” (Google that), and even after Senators Markey, Blumenthal, et al, ordered the FDA to assure Lyme testing was valid according to the FDA’s criteria.


Continuing the Chronology of Events in Redefining Lyme as a Non-Disease to Pass Off a Bogus Vaccine:

1986, Edward McSweegan, in a fake whistleblower letter to Senator Barry Goldwater, trashed U.S. Navy to divert their vector borne diseases funding to his buddies at the cabal. See the Navy’s furious response in the link below. McSweegan thinks there can be a vaccine for Relapsing Fever, confirming the paraphysical theory that “arrogance is the seed corn or germinal element in true, genuine stupidity” and/or the development of a criminal mind:

1988, Raymond Dattwyler, JJ Halperin, et al, & immune-suppressing, seronegative Lyme; supernatant (lipid layer) of borrelia mash causes NK cell anergy or a blunted immune response. Later, Dattwyler tells the FDA Vaccine committee that the seronegative patients are the sickest (now we know why, as shown above where Lyme and LYMErix are the Great Detonators of the latent herpes viruses and expanded or cross tolerance to other antigens than TLR2/1-agonist bearing kinds; in short, they’re double-fatigued and neurologically damaged):
Seronegative Lyme disease. Dissociation of specific T- and B-lymphocyte responses to Borrelia burgdorferi.
“We conclude that the presence of chronic Lyme disease cannot be excluded by the absence of antibodies against B. burgdorferi and that a specific T-cell blastogenic response to B. burgdorferi is evidence of infection in seronegative patients with clinical indications of chronic Lyme disease.”

”The disorder in these seronegative patients reflected a dissociation between T-cell and B-cell immune responses, in which the cell-mediated arm of the immune response was intact yet the humoral portion of the immune response to B. burgdorferi appeared to be blunted. This diminished antibody response is in contrast to the T-cell anergy commonly observed in several chronic infections (e.g., infection with Mycobacterium leprae or M. marinum, filiarasis, and some chronic fungal infections (29-33).”
Download it free:

Modulation of natural killer cell activity by Borrelia burgdorferi.
“Effect of B burgdorferi Culture on Normal PBL
…when lymphocytes are cultured in the presence of growing Bb there is a marked inhibition ( p < .0005 ) of NK activity on days 3, 5, and 7 when compared to lymphocytes cultured in BSKII media in the absence of spirochetes. This effect is not due to a selective depletion or toxicity to endogenous NK since viability studies and monoclonal antibodies demonstrate no significant changes after culture with the organism.
“The inhibition is directly attributable to the organism or its supernatants (data not shown).”
1990, CDC: “Diagnose Lyme as if it was Relapsing Fever” as previously mentioned.

1990, Allen Steere reports that “chronic, neurologic Lyme won’t test positive,” uses Dattwyler and Volkman’s Seronegative Lyme T Cell Assay
”Neurological Evaluation…
”If the patient was seronegative according to these methods, the serum was further tested by immunoblotting (25) and peripheral blood mononuclear cells were tested for reactivity with borrelial antigens by proliferative assay. (26)”

And what was reference number 26?  >>> Seronegative Lyme disease; dissociation of the specific T- and B- lymphocyte responses to Borrelia  burgdorferi – by Raymond Dattwyler, et al, see 1988 above.

1990, founded– a self-proclaimed “entrepreneurial quartet.” includes McSweegan, Fish, Wormser and Connolly. (You will want to look at who are their sponsors and on their board, seriously.)

1992, CDC officer Allen Steere falsifies testing in Europe:
The PubMed links to those 2 reports – no full text available, that is why I got them out of the Yale Medical Library in 2002 and scanned them in are:
Antibody responses to the three genomic groups of Borrelia burgdorferi in European Lyme borreliosis.
Western blotting in the serodiagnosis of Lyme disease.

Of those two reports of Steere’s lab shenanigans in Europe, only the second one is made a part of CDC’s Dearborn booklet. The first one – the one left out of the Dearborn booklet  – is where you can see how he falsified the testing for his later monopoly on post-LYMErix-approval for North America, with Corixa, Yale’s L2 Diagnostics and Imugen.

These entities are officially listed on the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as “partners” in sharing licensing of the RICO Monopoly patent with the strain of Borrelia that had dropped an OspA-B plasmid under US Patent 6,045,804. We will come to this later, as it is critical to the whole scam and shows the intent of their entire enterprise. Steere, in Europe used bogus “high-passage” borreliae strains that drop plasmids, and recombinant OspA and B without the lipids attached, helping leave OspA and B out of the diagnostic standard (see the Dearborn criteria above, there is no OspA or B, bands 31 and 34). The lipid parts of the lipoprotein are known to be immune-stimulatory, or to produce antibodies, so they obviously are necessary to come up with a legitimate criteria.

The following is the text (not in the abstract) of what is in the report on exactly how Steere defrauded the U.S. Government and people:
Antibody responses to the three genomic groups of Borrelia burgdorferi in European Lyme borreliosis.
“The group 1 strain of B. burgdorferi, G39/40, used in this study and in the previous study of US patients was isolated from an Ixodes dammini tick in Guilford, Connecticut [21]. The group 2 strain, FRG [Federal Republic of Germany], was isolated from Ixodes ricinus near Cologne [22]. The group 3 strain, IP3, was isolated from Ixodes persulcatus near Leningrad [23]. All three strains used in this study were high passage isolates, which were classified by Richard Marconi (Rocky Mountain Laboratory, Hamilton, MT) using 16S ribosomal RNA sequence determination as described [11, 24]. The recombinant preparations of OspA and OspB used in this study were purified maltose-binding protein-Osp fusion proteins derived from group 1 strain B31 [25]. The fusion proteins contained the full-length OspA or OspB sequence without the lipid moiety or the signal sequence…

The following is what it says in the Persing/Schoen/Steere or Imugen RICO Monopoly patent, that shows the intended monopoly – which required that OspA and B be missing from the diagnostic panel and from the spirochetes used to test the human population after the population was vaccinated with OspA:
Method for detecting B. burgdorferi infection
“…Additional uncertainty may arise if the vaccines are not completely protective; vaccinated patients with multisystem complaints characteristic of later presentations of Lyme disease may be difficult to distinguish from patients with vaccine failure.”

“The present invention provides a method useful to detect a B. burgdorferi infection in a subject. The method provided by the invention is particularly useful to discriminate B. burgdorferi infection from OspA vaccination, although it is sufficiently sensitive and specific to use in any general Lyme disease screening or diagnostic application. Thus, the method of the invention is particularly appropriate for large scale screening or diagnostic applications where only part of the subject population has been vaccinated or where the vaccination status of the population is unknown. “

The monopoly ^^ on post-LYMErix-FDA-approval testing for all vector borne diseases in America and Canada was their stated intention (entrepreneurial or enterprise = RICO) as is shows in this patent, by Persing.
Once LYMErix was on the market, a strain of borreliae that did not have the vaccine antigens in it would have to be used. Vaccine efficacy is never assessed with the very same antigen as the vaccine antigen. Otherwise, it would not be known if the victim has the actual infection in question, or that the antibody that shows up came from the vaccine. This Lyme/Vector-Borne Diseases monopoly depended on LYMErix being on the market.  That way, Corixa, L2 Diagnostics and Imugen would be the only labs in the country licensed to use this RICO strain. They would have access to all the human blood to pharm all sorts of DNA data to patent from humans as well as any new and emerging infectious diseases. That was the monopoly: LYMErix and the bogus testing criteria together with Persing’s RICO patent meant even more vaccine patents in the future. The three, Corixa, Imugen and Yale’s L2 Diagnostics, listed themselves as “partners” in a Securities and Exchange Commission announcement and advertised that this test would be available for the vaccinated population.

The Defendants falsified the “case definition” to leave out neurologic Lyme cases, and they left OspA and B out for a later monopoly on testing and future patents.  And there, you just read that that intention is clearly stated in a patent and method developed by Schoen and Persing in 1995 (US patent 6,045,804), next:

Borrelia burgdorferi enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for discrimination of OspA vaccination from spirochete infection.

1992, CDC staff, Barbara Johnson and Joe Piesman, own patents with SmithKline that show 2 kinds of Lyme, HLA-linked and non-HLA-linked antigens:


“Summary of the Invention
“In one aspect, the invention provides isolated B. burgdorferi antigens which are regulated and differentiated by growth of the B. burgdorferi in a tick vector. Novel antigens of the invention are listed below in Table I.
“Certain of these antigens are characterized as being B. burgdorferi B31 strain specific and major histocompatibility complex (MHC) nonrestricted. Certain other of these antigens are characterized as being MHC-restricted.”
Why is the CDC talking about ”MHC-restricted” vs. “MHC non-restricted?”

What we know that to mean is that classic “autoimmune” diseases tend to be MHC-(or HLA-) restricted, or the antigens, due to intermolecular forces, either bind in the HLA groove too strongly, the HLA-antigen complex is released as yet another free, new antigen, or the antigen does NOT bind tightly enough and the antigen falls out of the HLA groove to re-stimulate.

This “autoimmune” only is the new definition Steere claimed in these 1992 reports and at the CDC’s 1994 Dearborn conference.  He falsely claimed Lyme disease is only the HLA- or MHC-arthritis-restricted and threw out the other, meningitis cases.

Yet, here, in their 1992 patents with SmithKline, the CDC mentions the other outcome– the no- or fewer- antibody result. Therefore, they recognize the two kinds of Lyme: the 15% of the population with the Rheumatoid Arthritis genegtic background or HLA-restricted or arthritis cases,… and the 85% with seronegative, neurologic, long term, New Great Imitator Lyme.

The 85% of the chronic disease sufferers most likely suffer from the opportunistics (NIH’s “Post-Sepsis Syndrome”) from the imunosuppression that is caused by shed Borrelial TLR2/1-agonist antigens. Regardless, the falsified tests result in more early Lyme cases going undiagnosed and therefore progressing to permanent disability and early death.

1993, Barbour and Fish slam Neurologic Lyme victims in:
The Biological and Social Phenomenon of Lyme Disease
Barbour and Fish admit that Phase I and Phase II trials of OspA vaccines are underway. Therefore, as is shown in the Persing RICO Monopoly patent (US 6,045,804), they already knew the OspA vaccines were causing a disease indistinguishable from vaccine failure, or CHRONIC LYME:

Here would be a good place to show what data was received by the USDOJ in New Haven, CT, on this fraud and RICO scamin July 2003, because the difference between neurologic Lyme and arthritis Lyme is so clear:

Compare the blots from the two kinds of Lyme in this  (above) July 2003 RICO complaint. On the left with the faint antibody bands is neurological Lyme (the sickest, according to Ray Dattwyler), and on the right are the HLA-linked outcomes of arthritis and acrodermatitis:

Hence, the Defendants left out the neurological outcomes in their Dearborn scam. The whole point of the redefinition of Lyme at Dearborn was to narrow it to just the HLA-linked, arthritis, supposedly autoimmune, hypersensitivity cases. This is how and why they get away with perjury. When the IDSA/Yale Lyme Defendants say “Lyme Disease,” they mean exclusively “HLA-linked arthritis AND NO OTHER SYMPTOMS.” No lawyer was or is aware of this semantics scam.

Jump to 2005; Here Klempner and Wormser re-revealed that “Lyme disease” is just one thing: a bad knee and no other illness signs. However, as shown above, there are two distinct outcomes of Lyme borreliosis. The controversial one (neurologic-, chronic fatigue- Lyme) really does not have a name right now. Therefore, “Lyme disease” is defined as ONLY a bad knee. It’s a legal definition. It’s also criminal one, based on fraud and no consensus, but here is what it is again (2005):

A Case-Control Study to Examine HLA Haplotype Associations in Patients with Posttreatment Chronic Lyme Disease
”… There appear to be at least 2 distinct syndromes after antibiotic treatment. [They have no data on un-treated people, obviously, since they could not ethically conduct such a study-KMD]  One syndrome has localized symptoms that are similar to pretreatment symptoms. Patients with this syndrome often have recurrent episodes of arthritis/synovitis. Results of synovial fluid cultures and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for B. burgdorferi are generally negative…. [See the DNA/RNA Shell Game report, this is not true; it’s a shell game; they use DNA that they know won’t be there in that sequence due to antigenic variation to claim “No Lyme here.”–]

“…Patients generally feel well aside from their arthritis symptoms.”
Let’s restate what Wormser and Klempner are trying to say in that 2005 report:
— The people with the falsified Dearborn case definition of “only an HLA-linked arthritis in a knee” have only an HLA-linked arthritis in a knee and no other symptoms.
— If you falsify the case definition and say “ONLY the HLA-linked hypersensitivity response of bad knee can be a ‘case’ of ‘Lyme disease,’” you can then, 11 years later say, “Oh, how amazing for us to find only the HLA-linked case definition of arthritis-only is an HLA-linked arthritis-only, and is only a bad knee.“

These people are crazy, yes, if that is what you were thinking.

Also, the CDC recently reacted to the Senators’ (Blumenthal, Markey, et al) letter to the Office of Policy and Management, where the Senators are forcing the FDA to do their jobs and assure that the testing for Lyme is validated according to their own FDA rules. (See the Primers Shell Game for more on that;
The CDC is trying to say that the Dearborn method was FDA validated, when it was not:

”Washington – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) was joined by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) in calling on the Obama administration to release draft guidance to ensure appropriate oversight of laboratory developed diagnostic tests (LDTs), which are used to help diagnose specific forms of cancer and other diseases and are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Laboratories initially manufactured LDTs that could be used for low-risk diagnostics or for rare diseases, but with new technology, they have become a staple of clinical decision-making and are being used to diagnose high-risk but relatively common diseases such as ovarian cancer. Recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reviewed a frequently utilized LDT to detect Lyme disease and found “serious concerns” about false-positive results and misdiagnosis. The CDC recommended that the diagnosis of Lyme disease should instead be left to tests approved by the FDA. …”

Here are the FDA’s rules for the validation of an analytical method:

which were met by Yale’s 1991 Flagellin Method Patent US # 5,618,533 and this report:

Molecular characterization of the humoral response to the 41-kilodalton flagellar antigen of Borrelia burgdorferi, the Lyme disease agent.

The earliest humoral response in patients infected with Borrelia burgdorferi, the agent of Lyme disease, is directed against the spirochete’s 41-kDa flagellar antigen. In order to map the epitopes recognized on this antigen, 11 overlapping fragments spanning the flagellin gene were cloned by polymerase chain reaction and inserted into an Escherichia coli expression vector which directed their expression as fusion proteins containing glutathione S-transferase at the N terminus and a flagellin fragment at the C terminus. Affinity-purified fusion proteins were assayed for reactivity on Western blots (immunoblots) with sera from patients with late-stage Lyme disease. The same immunodominant domain was bound by sera from 17 of 18 patients. This domain (comprising amino acids 197 to 241) does not share significant homology with other bacterial flagellins and therefore may be useful in serological testing for Lyme disease.”

As you can see, the FDA has not changed their rules on how to validate a method:
”Under the FD&C Act, the FDA assures both the analytical validity (e.g., analytical specificity and sensitivity, accuracy and precision) and clinical validity through its premarket clearance and approval process.”
Also, Borrelia burgdorferi is closest genetically to B. anserina, an African bird borreliosis, so it is not surprising that Lyme is found all across the United States, being carried by birds:

Many California bird species host the Lyme disease bacterium, study finds:

See more at: for the phylogeny or the genetics that shows Lyme is closest to B. anserina (from Africa).

Therefore there cannot be any “disease calculator” for Lyme as there fraudulently had been in the past, in an attempt to limit diagnoses. Just as all kinds of Borreliae are everywhere, so is this specific one, burgdorferi.


Returning to the Chronology of the Crime
1994, June; FDA LYMErix Meeting (note that June precedes October–when the Dearborn stunt took place– so the FDA never approved of the Dearborn method, not to mention it was research fraud, and not a consensus):

Transcript of June 1994 FDA Meeting Minutes on Lyme and potential vaccines:

Dr.O’BRIEN:  “I was concerned about your last slide where you said there was a poor correlation between serologic response and clinical disease.  And as I heard you to say, some people who mount better immune responses get worse disease. Did I hear you say that?”

DR. DATTWYLER:  “No, no, I said the reverse. The better responses tended to have better response.  And I should clarify where this is from. This is from antibiotic trials. These are treatment trials of erythema migrans, in which individuals given an antibiotic regimen which was not optimal – we did not know that it was not optimal at the time – the ones that failed to mount a vigorous response tended to do worse, clinically. So, there was an inverse correlation between the degree of serologic response and the outcome.  

“So, individuals with a poor immune response tend to have worse disease.”

We know why, now, that “individuals with a poor antibody response have worse disease.” Borrelial fungal antigens cause immunosuppression and a classic post-sepsis-like result with chronic active EBV, HHV-6, et al. And we know this is not just from antibiotic treatment as Dattwyler said at this FDA meeting–that the diminished responses are due to the organism or its supernatants, like OspA, and that that is typical for fungal infections:
Seronegative Lyme disease. Dissociation of specific T- and B-lymphocyte responses to Borrelia burgdorferi.
”We conclude that the presence of chronic Lyme disease cannot be excluded by the absence of antibodies against B. burgdorferi and that a specific T-cell blastogenic response to B. burgdorferi is evidence of infection in seronegative patients with clinical indications of chronic Lyme disease.”
”The disorder in these seronegative patients reflected a dissociation between T-cell and B-cell immune responses, in which the cell-mediated arm of the immune response was intact yet the humoral portion of the immune response to B. burgdorferi appeared to be blunted.  This diminished antibody response is in contrast to the T-cell anergy commonly observed in several chronic infections (e.g., infection with Mycobacterium leprae or M. marinum, filiarasis, and some chronic fungal infections (29-33).”

Modulation of natural killer cell activity by Borrelia burgdorferi.
“Effect of B burgdorferi Culture on Normal PBL
“…when lymphocytes are cultured in the presence of growing Bb there is a marked inhibition ( p < .0005 ) of NK activity on days 3, 5, and 7 when compared to lymphocytes cultured in BSKII media in the absence of spirochetes.  This effect is not due to a selective depletion or toxicity to endogenous NK since viability studies and monoclonal antibodies demonstrate no significant changes after culture with the organism.
“The inhibition is directly attributable to the organism or its supernatants (data not shown).”

The diminution of antibody response is due to the fungal antigens shed by Borrelia and not antibiotics since this phenomenon is seen in parallel in other human fungal-exposure immunology.  See those other scientific examples, including from the CDC on the failed Autism vaccines and the failed Tuberculosis vaccines, here:

1994, CDC’s invitation to participate in the Dearborn event.  Labs were invited; they said the Steere proposal was only, on average, 15% accurate; CDC then blew off these labs’ recommendations:

1994, October; CDC’s Dearborn Booklet .pdf

Dearborn, Who Said What (also summarized for the FDA at their Jan 2001 hearing on adverse events to LYMErix):

1) Gary Wormser at New York Medical College reports that Steere’s Dearborn proposal method detected 9/59 of IgG cases or is 15% accurate, missing 85% of the cases:

Serodiagnosis in Early Lyme Disease
”Overall, 51 of 59 (86%) convalescent phase serum specimens were reactive by IB [Dearborn criteria Immunoblot-KMD], 35 of which were interpreted as positive; 26 based on IgM criteria, 8 based on both IgM and IgG, and 1 based on IgG criteria…”

8 plus 1 is 9.  9 out 59 cases met the Dearborn criteria in IgG.  Therefore Dearborn only detects 15% of the later Lyme cases, perfectly consistent with the average accuracy of Steere’s falsified Dearborn at Dearborn, and with the percentage of people with arthritis HLAs in the general population.

AGAIN:  Gary Wormser published that 9 out of 59 cases were positive to Dearborn later in the disease; Gary Wormser assessing Steere’s Dearborn panel proposal in this report, says it only detects 15% of the cases in IgG.   Wormser reported that the Dearborn case definition missed 85% of the cases, yet later, the Klempner study used the Dearborn criteria, making both Klempner and the “Guidelines” totally invalid based on this one report along by Gary Wormser.  And research fraud on his part.

2) Igenex —Steere’s IgG panel detected 8% of the cases

3) Imugen —Steere’s IgG panel detected 14% of the cases

4) Wisconsin —Steere’s method was 15% accurate

5) UCONN —Larry Zemel was referring to Lyme as comparable to only juvenile rheumatoid arthritis when of course it isn’t. Recommended adding band 50 for children’s blots.

6) Roche— 28% were positive for 5 of 10 Steere IgG bands.

7) Wadsworth— had some different scoring system. Did not report on accuracy of Steere’s method

8) Ontario Ministry of Health—did not give an assessment of the Steere proposal (page 86)

9) Lutheran Hospital— 22% were accurate by Steere’s IgG

10) MarDx Labs— recommended adding bands 31 and 34, but were given CDC positive arthritis positive blood to falsely qualify their test strips. Their Western Blot test strips were used in both OspA vaccine trials. MarDx was later sold to an Irish company, Trinity Biotech, Dublin; all the data they had about this crime was taken out of the country.

11) CDC Atlanta— talked about mice, not humans. The mouse criteria was 2 out of three from OspC, 16 kD, 17.9 kD, for the mice.
We got this standard anyway, even though none of the invited participants agreed – not by a long shot.  See the Primers Shell Game reports here or at this link: for an explanation of how VALID testing is performed according to the FDA rules, and how Yale knows all about how to validate a method for Lyme (Bb-specific flagellar antigen) and patented it (US 5,618,533). This is all obvious criminal fraud.  Yale owned a valid test for Lyme but did not use it to qualify their other patented product, rOspA, LYMErix.

Who was involved with approving the bogus Dearborn method at Dearborn when all the invited labs said it was only 15% accurate (and FDA criterion for validation)?

None other than the CDC vaccine patent owners and all the scammers you see here:

“Alan Barbour,” “Edward McSweegan,” “Allen Steere,” “Arthur Weinstein,” “The CDC Lyme Disease Group” (Barbara Johnson), etc. (The same people involved in the OspA vaccines scam were involved in falsifying the testing and who were the original members and “advisors” of the
A view of the Dearborn event by a participant.  It’s an independent paper about it; Igenex’s Nick Harris’ report published in the Lyme Disease Foundation’s journal:

Evidence Lyme Defendants knew LYMErix produced the same “multisystem disease” as “Chronic Lyme”
1) Ben Luft said it at the 1998 FDA meeting:

BEN LUFT: “The point that I wanted to make in regard to the study is that there is very heavy dependence on serologic confirmation. And when we start thinking about the adverse events, *** it was stated originally when we got the overview of the disease that the disease is really quite protean. And actually the adverse events are very similar to what the disease manifestations are.**** And if you start to, as I think Dr. Hall was eluding to — if you start to kind of say well how often do you actually become seropositive, you can start to have a different take on when someone has an adverse event or whether it is disease specific or infection specific versus vaccine specific. And I think that that is an important issue that we have to deal with. …”

2) Dave Persing said it in his RICO patent (above),

Method for detecting B. burgdorferi infection
“…Additional uncertainty may arise if the vaccines are not completely protective; vaccinated patients with multisystem complaints characteristic of later presentations of Lyme disease may be difficult to distinguish from patients with vaccine failure.”

3) Fish and Barbour trashed Lyme disease victims with their “Social Aspects” report in 1993 (above), paving the way to slander and libel their future LYMErix victims. They reveal that the OspA vaccine trials are underway in that report. This shows intent to cause harm.
The Biological and Social Phenomenon of Lyme Disease

4) Dave Persing (who worked on this with Robert Schoen, as shown above) and his company Corixa wanted to sell vaccine adjuvants, but they had to drop OspA as a candidate adjuvant because, as Persing said in another patent (applied for May, 2001, while LYMErix was still on the market, harming people; he never said anything to the FDA about it):

Prophylactic and therapeutic treatment of infectious and other diseases with mono- and disaccharide-based compounds
“Accordingly, the methods of the invention provide a powerful and selective approach for modulating the innate immune response pathways in animals without giving rise to the toxicities often associated with the native bacterial components that normally stimulate those pathways.”,800,613.PN.&OS=PN/6,800,613&RS=PN/6,800,613

In this complaint to the UN Human Rights Commission and the foreign embassies:
it shows that Corixa got an 11 million dollar “biodefense contract” from the NIH and the adjuvants they are allegedly producing are TLR4 agonists, not TLR2/1 agonists like LYMErix, because Persing et al know OspA as an adjuvant is “too toxic in the native form” and  “…Additional uncertainty may arise if the vaccines are not completely protective; vaccinated patients with multisystem complaints characteristic of later presentations of Lyme disease may be difficult to distinguish from patients with vaccine failure,” which means they know OspA is too toxic and causes a chronic illness identical to chronic Lyme.

5) In 1998 Yale’s Robert Schoen wrote the following article in the ALDF’s book, Lyme Disease, ACP Key Diseases Series, published in 1998 to coincide with the release of LYMErix onto the market. Once again. Schoen is paving the way, instructing other “doctors” to view LYMErix-injured people and Chronic Lyme victims (which are essentially the same disease, Post-Sepsis Syndrome) through the same victim-blaming lens.

The article is called Clinical Vignettes, Case 13, A Vaccine Recipient who Develops Arthralgia and Fatigue, page 238-9, and is about what to do with a person who has had the Yale dangerous rOspA non-vaccine.   He says not to test these LYMErix victims and he minimizes their symptoms, knowing that late, neurologic chronic Lyme symptoms are identical to what Schoen says are “nonspecific” (fatigue, meningitis, etc).

Schoen says the exact reverse in the Persing-Schoen-Corixa-RICO patent (US. Pat. No. 6,045,804 and associated journal report, “multisystem complaints characteristic of late Lyme.”

WRITES Yale’s Robert SCHOEN (you can tell this is BS because it does not make any real sense):


”Is this patient’s presentation compatible with Lyme disease?

“This patient presents with nonspecific symptoms, including arthralgias and fatigue.  Although he lives in an area endemic for Lyme disease, these findings by themselves do not point to Lyme disease.
            “The risks of a false-positive serologic test result in this patient will be significant because the prevalence of Lyme disease in such individuals is low.  More importantly, this patient has already received a Lyme disease vaccine.  Because of this, he will have antibodies against the 31-kd OspA Borrelia burgdorferi protein.  These antibodies will be directed by the Lyme ELISA and will generate a positive test resut.
            “In the absence of specific clinical features suggesting a diagnosis of Lyme disease, the best course of action may be not to do serologic testing for Lyme disease at all. If such testing is to be done in a person who has received the Lyme disease vaccine, it will need to be sent to a laboratory where the Western blot analysis can be done that omits the 31-kd response.”

“In Lyme disease recipients (sic), Western blot analysis is indicated to distinguish Lyme disease from seroconversion caused by vaccination.”

Schoen (above) probably means “In Lyme disease vaccine recipients, Western blot analysis is indicated to distinguish disease from seroconversion by vaccination.”

This does not make a whole lot of sense because Schoen first said not to test them, just blow these people off, essentially, because their symptoms were vague (means, “not a red, swollen knee”).  But then Schoen went on to say that if you MUST test them, use the Persing-Schoen RICO patent method with the OspA-B plasmid missing, making it very clear that the reason OspA and B were left out of the Dearborn standard was to satisfy this subsequent racketeering condition or monopoly on testing, once LYMErix was on the market.  That is why I call this the RICO patent:

This transcript of Schoen’s “Clinical Vignettes” above is in that textbook with the libel and false statements including the Munchausen’s accusations:

See more at

From start to finish, from when the was established in 1990,… to Steere going to Europe in 1992 to falsify the case definition antibody panel and adding the ridiculous ELISA “screening test” (for arthritis only) for a fungal-like disease, … to the CDC falsifying the testing for Lyme at Dearborn in 1994, … to lying to the FDA and the journals about their outcomes of the 2 vaccine trials in 1998, to fake “Guidelines” based on the bogus Klempner non-retreatment non-study in 2001,…. the point of this scam was to create a condition where only they – the CDC staff and the – would be able to capitalize on vector-borne diseases vaccines and test kits.

They intended to get all the grants, all the royalties, and to define the diseases based on their fake products.

Most importantly, they wanted this post-:LYMErix monopoly on human blood testing because they could pharm from that not only human DNA and disease susceptibilities, but new vector borne disease DNA to patent.  It was all about the money.  It was all about cornering the market on this new genre of potential diseases resulting from global pollution.

Falsifying the Vaccine Trial Results, Part 2 of the Cryme – the Unreadable Western Blots.

The 1998 Vaccines Reports (ImuLyme and LYMErix):

LYMErix results (76% “safe and effective”):

ImmuLyme results (92% “safe and effective”):
From the LYMErix trial, “categories of outcomes:”

YET, here are the Defendants claiming “we can’t read our OspA vaccine results” reports, which means they lied in their OspA vaccine safety and efficacy reports, since they both claimed to be using the Dearborn method and MarDx’s Western Blot test strips:
1) Yale’s Robert Schoen and Mayo’s/Corixa’s David Persing, with John Anderson,1995-6; the RICO report:

2) Shoen and Persing in their 1995-6 RICO method patent:

3) David Persing and Lenny Sigal explaining that the Western Blots of OspA-vaccine victims were not readable (which means whoever was in charge of data safety monitoring like Arthur Weinstein is in big trouble):

4) Yale’s Robert Schoen in the 1998 Munchausen’s Book, instructing MDs to blow off LYMErix-systemically-injured people (“but send the post-vaccination blood to the Yale L2 Diagnostics RICO lab if you must bother to be a physician”).

They used the bogus Dearborn method, and did not report that their Western Blots were unreadable.  Each vaccine trial report and summary was 2 false claims.


In the fall of 1998, the LYMErix vaccine was approved, anyway, by the FDA (the FDA panel being loaded with people like Allen Steere, Robert Schoen, and Vijay Sikand – the very people who ran the OspA trials).  It came onto the market in late 1998 “despite numerous provisos.”

More than 1,000 systemic adverse events were reported through the VAERS from September 1999 to November 2000, whereupon the FDA granted a public hearing, January 31, 2001:

Whereupon, the whistle was blown on Dearborn and how LYMErix actually caused immunosuppression (the FDA did not scan in the last 19 pages of this booklet, which were 19 pages out of the Dearborn booklet, proving no one agreed with Steere’s proposal for an antibody panel for a “case definition”):

Several months later, in the fall of 2001, Karen Forschner of the Hartford, CT based Lyme Disease Foundation ( delivered to the FDA – in person, a patent owned by Brigitte Huber at Tufts University, where it was declared that OspA was technically a “toxin,” right in the abstract (US Patent 6,689,384). The FDA then gave SmithKline and Yale, the assignee of the LYMErix patent, an ultimatum: “Either you remove LYMErix voluntarily or we will order it off the market.” SmithKline chose to avoid the embarrassment and pulled their own non-vaccine.

We’re still stuck with this bogus Dearborn case definition, despite numerous attempts at lawsuits against IDSA, SmithKline, and filing complaints to the U. S. Department of Justice. It is still very dangerous for the public to be unaware that the average person, or 85% of us – who are the “seronegative patients are the sickest,” have no chance of testing positive to this criminal CDC-Dearborn standard, because the actual disease is one of immunosuppression, or is an Acquired Immune Deficiency, or is similar to AIDS with all the opportunistic viral infections and lymphocyte mutations that can’t be treated with antibiotics, alone.

It was said at the time LYMErix was still on the market that this vaccine, via its claimed mechanism of disinfecting ticks with human antibodies (yes, if you can believe it), that LYMErix would turn humans into walking canisters of tick disinfectant, when in fact, LYMErix turned people into walking “cesspools of disease.” The same is true for Chronic Lyme. Chronic Lyme victims’ immune systems are “overwhelmed”- a term used by CDC officer Alan Barbour, when describing what antigenic variation in spirochetes does to humans (US Patent 6,719,983). This is a term you want to remember in case you hear it again: “overwhelmed” immune system means: “turned off.” “Turned off” is the complete opposite of an “inflammatory” or “autoimmune disease.”
Charge One:  Falsifying the case definition- a CDC Staff Conspiracy; Steere, Barbour, and Johnson

A) CDC officers Allen Steere, Alan Barbour, Barbara Johnson conspired to falsify the case definition for Lyme disease.  [Conspiracy to Defraud, see the 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).
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 Neurologic 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 were under 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 A 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 ceftriaxone 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 checklists 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:
”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 inferring they were crazy; the UN complaint is referenced:

Charge Seven: The Patents show contradictory claims to public claims made by the cabal; each claim should be examined and be compared to each Defendant’s 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.

Charge Nine: Congenital Lyme;  Yale staff wrote at least 3 reports on congenital Lyme in autopsy findings and regarding the effect of maternal antibodies on the fetus.  Later, Yale’s 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.”


One thought on “The Conspirators; they own the patents and changed the testing

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s