There is an apparent controversy going on in Australia regarding Lyme disease. Numerous Australians are claiming to be afflicted by the disease, but the Australian government “does not support the diagnosis”. So, are cases of Lyme disease breaking out, or is this a high-level cover-up? Let me explain why it is neither, because there are fatal flaws in both sides of this story…

Many of the topics my husband Mark and I talk about are considered “controversial”. However, the only controversy there should be is the discrepancy between the medico-pharmaceutical industry’s narratives and the actual scientific evidence. This is particularly so with the virus model and germ theory, the problems of which we have been exposing for several years.

In amongst this are alleged specific diseases such as Lyme, said to be caused by Borrelia bacteria that are introduced into humans through tick bites. In 2023, I published “The Lyme Disease Lie” in both video and article formats and it generated quite a response. I have found that for many people given the Lyme label, it is difficult for them to appreciate the lack of sound science surrounding the diagnosis. To be clear, we are not dismissing any symptoms they may have but are pointing out that bacteria are not to blame.

The above-mentioned presentations showed that the widespread claim that Borrelia is “pathogenic” (disease-causing) is patently false. The error originated in a small number of studies that were done in the early 1980s. You can watch a more detailed account of the problems that were exposed in my longer presentation. For the purposes of the present article I will provide a brief summary.

The first claim is that Borrelia bacteria are injected into humans through tick bites. However, the much-cited 1982 study by Willy Burgdorfer’s team failed to show that this took place. Indeed, in the experiment where hundreds of ticks were allowed to feed on eight live rabbits, not once were the bacteria found in their skin or blood. The team simply inferred that bacterial transfer might take place because the microbes were found in the guts of many ticks.

The second claim is that Borrelia is found in the blood of patients with Lyme disease. The reference is another Burgdorfer paper, this one published in 1983. In the study, they took blood samples from patients thought to have Lyme disease. Out of the 36 patients, they found Borrelia in a grand total of…two. Aside from the fact that Borrelia bacteria were clearly not found in the majority of cases, it was an observational study so could only describe an association at most. (A controlled experimental study is required to make determinations about causation.)

If you were paying attention you may have noticed that the patients in this second study were “thought” to have Lyme disease. And this is where the wheels fall off the entity being a specific disease. The symptoms of Lyme are non-specific and it is said that “not everyone with Lyme disease has all the symptoms, and many of these symptoms can also occur with other diseases”. Therefore, by definition, it cannot be objectively diagnosed based on the clinical presentation.

So what about diagnostic tests? Because the supposed offending Borrelia cannot usually be found, an antibody test was developed. We have exposed the lack of specificity and validity for antibody tests many times. In this case, it is hard to emphasise just how bad the Lyme test is – for example, it was positive in 18% of healthy blood donors in Norway. In other words, by far the most people who will test Lyme positive have no symptoms.

There is a newer polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for Borrelia, but again, if the bacteria have never been shown to be the cause of disease, how can it be a diagnostic test? Strangely, there are complaints that the hyper-sensitive PCR fails to detect cases, with the excuse being there must be too few Borrelia around. Then on the flip side, Wikipedia’s “Lyme disease” page reports that the PCR often generates false, in other words, unwanted positives as well. At this stage, why not just decide in advance whether the test result should be positive or not?

Part of the reason why Lyme disease is so controversial relates to who actually has “it”. The diagnosis is completely subjective and there are no suitable tests. Hence in Australia there are “experts” who declare that it exists within the border, and “experts” who deny the possibility. Neither of these sides appears to realise that there is no “it” when it comes to the scientific evidence.

Yes, people get sick with non-specific presentations and yes, a minority have been bitten by ticks or other biting bugs. However, there is no evidence for Borrelia being the cause of any disease and no relationship between the bacteria and so-called Lyme symptoms. Hence the Lyme disease label is most likely to be a disservice to the recipient as it leads to unnecessary anxiety, inappropriate “treatments” and a failure to identify the real cause of illness.

On the issue of unnecessary anxiety, there has also been the claim that Lyme is the result of a US military bioweapons program. To address this fear propaganda we recently produced another Lyme video specifically quelling such a notion. To cut to the chase, how can there be a bioweapon if there are no pathogenic bacteria?

Dr Sam Bailey is a medical author and health educator from New Zealand. Her books include Virus Mania, Terrain Therapy and The Final Pandemic.