1. Guest, click here to read the 'News in Brief' post for w/c 7th Oct.
    Dismiss Notice

Discovery Of The Lyme Disease Agent

Discussion in 'Infections: Lyme, Candida, EBV ...' started by duncan, Oct 12, 2019.

  1. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    This offers a behind-the-scenes look at what went on during the discovery of Lyme. It's written by two of the surviving team members.

    https://mbio.asm.org/content/10/5/e02166-19

    It's cool on a number of levels. It is very detailed. It shares little tidbits like how strain B31 got its name (virtually all Lyme tests in the US are B31 kits). It brings together Lyme, Babesia, and Rickettsia...Anyway, lots of cool stuff.

    This matters for a couple reasons. One potential one ( @chrisb ) is that it seems to me like it may, in part, have been inspired by the book "Bitten", and the Congressional inquiry into the biowarfare history that purportedly involve all three of those biological agents. Of course, it may not. It could simply be coincidental to that investigation and to Kris Newby's book. Either way, if you like to get down into how discovery works with some infectious diseases and parasites, this is a fun read.
     
    Mariaba and chrisb like this.
  2. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    They mention that when first trying to figure out what caused Lyme disease, EIS investigators suspected a virus. What they don't say - at least I didn't see it - it that one of the reasons EIS investigators thought it was caused by a virus is because antibiotics didn't cure enough patients.

    Of course, to this day it still holds true that abx leave too many patients sick, albeit to a lesser degree thx to better abx.
     
  3. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,092
    Likes Received:
    14,049
    This is very helpful. There is no reason to suppose that either Bernach or Barbour has anything to hide. They therefore point to further problems about WB's evidence. The detail of Barbour's account shows how helpful it is to still have contemporaneous notes available. It is a pity that WB's notes are missing.

    Bernach says this:

    Willy never found any rickettsia in the hemocytes of I. scapularis ticks, nor were we aware then of the ubiquitous spotted fever group rickettsial ovarial symbiont of this tick, now known as Rickettsia buchneri (30)

    It would be helpful if he were to indicate what is meant by "we" and when he was first made aware. WB seems to have stopped referring to either Swiss Agent or East side agent by 1980. This would seem to suggest that at that time Bernach, his supposed collaborator, was not, at the time, or perhaps, even, after, informed of these developments. That seems a strange way to treat a colleague, but is as might have been presumed.

    Barbour's story about the Steere's leptospire is interesting. Does it display evidence of a faulty memory on the part of WB or something more significant? It is not as if the biography was merely a record of conversations. He was given a transcript and made amendments before approving it. For all we know he might even have had assistance in finalising the document.

    I also thought this comment by Barbour noteworthy:

    Until the late 1981 events described here, there was no research program dedicated to Lyme disease at RML, although the association of Lyme disease with ticks had been established more than 2 years before (45), and RML was the go-to tick-borne disease lab for the NIH.

    When WB told his biographer he had no interest in Lyme was he merely playing with words and relating the official position? Whether or not there was a research program, there seems to have been research.
     
    duncan likes this.
  4. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    We know he had an interest in Lyme. We also know he was not happy with the CDC/NIH/IDSA stance on Lyme.

    Don't you find the timing of these mini "recountings" somewhat curious, given the release of Newby's book and the resulting Congressional scrutiny? I am wondering how sanitized these histories are.

    I also wonder how this story would unfold if you replace "Borrelia" for "Lyme."
     
    Mariaba likes this.
  5. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    Maybe so. What about Ft. Detrick and the eight-ball?

    And how could both of these researchers not allude, by name, to the Swiss Agent given that, according to Newby and that other guy whose name I forget, it was considered to be the causative agent of Lyme, or at least it was going to be characterized as such, for a significant time - by both WB and Steere?
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2019
    chrisb likes this.
  6. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,092
    Likes Received:
    14,049
    I know we know. It is merely a question of whether it was a formal, on the record, interest, or something less official. In any event the Head of the Lab (was he called Phillips?) seems to have been involved also judging by correspondence from Steere.

    I am sure this is done for the benefit of the Congressional scrutiny, but I think one takes it at face value unless clearly evidenced discrepancies are indicated.
     
    duncan likes this.
  7. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,092
    Likes Received:
    14,049
    Well, we have evidence for the existence of Fort Detrick and the eight-ball.

    I think the name you want is Piller. In fairness to Bernach and Barbour they seem to be stating only what they have first hand knowledge of. It is entirely conceivable that Barbour was not aware of the Swiss agent connection. Bernach should have been, but seems to be saying that he was not. If he wasn't told, he wasn't told.
     
    duncan likes this.
  8. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    Pillar! Yep. Well done!
     
  9. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,092
    Likes Received:
    14,049
    @duncan Help, please! What does this mean in Barbour's section of the paper?

    In the late 1970s, Lyme disease was beginning to take off in the northeastern United States, as Jorge relates above, but not anywhere close to its level in Utah.

    To an English English speaker that can only mean that levels of Lyme disease were higher in Utah than in the north-eastern states. Can this be true? Is there some idiomatic usage with which I am unfamiliar which would give rise to a different interpretation?
     
    duncan likes this.
  10. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    I would chalk it up to a mistake. I suspect he was alluding to arthropod diseases in general, e.g. rickettsia, and something got edited out. There is no way Lyme was more prevalent in Utah than the NorthEast US. Not sure I scapularis even existed in Utah back then.
     
    chrisb likes this.

Share This Page