From an interview with Dr. Jennifer Letitia / By: The Health Tech Reporter Editorial team
Lyme disease, first documented in Lyme, Connecticut, in the 1970s, is far more geographically widespread than often acknowledged. According to Dr. Jennifer Letitia, denial remains pervasive across the medical community, particularly in regions where Lyme is not "officially recognized," such as Florida. This misconception persists despite ample evidence that Lyme-carrying ticks can be dispersed nationally via human travel and bird migration. Ticks, as disease vectors, introduce not only Borrelia burgdorferi (the bacterium that causes Lyme disease) but also a host of co-infections such as Bartonella, Babesia, and Anaplasma—each capable of triggering debilitating symptoms.
Dr. Letitia emphasizes that the full
spectrum of Lyme disease and its coinfections is often overlooked due to
outdated assumptions and limited testing protocols. In many cases, chronically
ill patients are dismissed or misdiagnosed with psychological conditions,
delaying proper care.
One of the core challenges in diagnosing Lyme disease is the pathogen’s biological complexity. Borrelia exists in three primary forms: the spirochete (active), the cystic or round body form (dormant and antibiotic-resistant), and biofilm communities, which are complex matrices that shield pathogens from immune detection and therapeutic agents. These biofilms are particularly insidious, requiring enzymatic disruption to render pathogens vulnerable to treatment.
Current testing methods—chiefly
antibody-based serology—are limited in scope and sensitivity. Tests may yield
false negatives when the immune system is suppressed or when the pathogen is
not present in circulating blood. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing,
while precise for detecting DNA, is only useful during acute infections and
cannot always distinguish between active and inactive pathogens.
Additionally, co-infections such as
Bartonella and Babesia may not be detected through routine Lyme testing.
Bartonella, for example, can cause severe neuropsychiatric symptoms, including
eating disorders and obsessive-compulsive behaviors, especially in children.
Such cases are often misdiagnosed as primary psychiatric disorders, leading to
inappropriate treatment with antipsychotic or antidepressant medications rather
than antimicrobial therapy.
Controversies
Around the Lyme Vaccine and Treatment Protocols
Dr. Letitia expresses significant
concern about the resurgence of the Lyme vaccine, which she views as both
biologically risky and misleading. Previous iterations of the vaccine were
withdrawn due to adverse effects, including patients developing Lyme-like
symptoms without infection, attributed to genetic vulnerabilities (e.g., HLA-DR
variations). The current vaccine under development uses similar mechanisms
without adequately addressing those past concerns.
She argues that vaccination may
create a false sense of security and interfere with diagnostic
clarity—producing either false positives or negatives in testing—and fails to
address coinfections altogether.
Regarding treatment, she is critical
of the standard prophylactic approach (typically two weeks of doxycycline),
noting its inadequacy. Studies show that even three weeks of treatment may lead
to chronic Lyme symptoms in at least 20% of patients. Additionally, doxycycline
alone is ineffective against many co-infections and is contraindicated in
children, who are often left undertreated or misdiagnosed.
Rather than relying solely on laboratory data, Dr. Letitia employs a comprehensive patient history, symptom mapping, and pattern recognition methodology. She requires her patients to complete detailed questionnaires covering symptomatology related to Lyme, mold, Bartonella, Babesia, and post-viral syndromes. This forms the basis of her diagnostic hypothesis.
In practice, she sometimes uses pharmaceutical interventions diagnostically. For example, in suspected Babesia cases—marked by fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, and low hemoglobin—she may administer a once-weekly antimalarial medication (e.g., Arakoda, a formulation of Tafenoquine). A strong patient reaction, such as night sweats or exacerbation of symptoms, can confirm the clinical suspicion of Babesia.
Her primary diagnostic lab is
IGeneX, a California-based specialty lab known for its Lyme testing. IGeneX has
recently received FDA approval for certain antibody-based assays. Unlike the
rigid five-band requirement of CDC-aligned labs, IGeneX interprets two bands
(e.g., the highly specific 23 kDa band) as sufficient evidence of exposure.
However, she emphasizes that antibody testing alone cannot distinguish between
past and current infection, reinforcing the need for clinical correlation.
Imaging
and the Role of Technology
Dr. Letitia advocates for innovation
in diagnostics, particularly through non-invasive imaging. She highlights the
potential role of Dr. Robert Bard, a leading expert in advanced ultrasound imaging,
in this regard. She sees promise in Bard’s application of ultrasound to detect
skin changes caused by Bartonella and Morgellons disease—both linked to chronic
vector-borne infections.
Morgellons, a poorly understood
condition involving thread-like fibers protruding from skin lesions, remains
controversial and frequently dismissed as delusional. Dr. Letitia notes that
ultrasound imaging may reveal underlying tissue changes and could offer
validation and clinical insight for patients otherwise labeled as psychiatric
cases.
Moreover, she calls for greater
exploration of ultrasound as a tool for assessing collagenous tissues (joints,
skin, brain) where pathogens like Borrelia and Bartonella reside. While current
imaging tools such as NeuroQuant offer structural brain metrics, they fall
short of detecting infectious footprints. She posits that advanced imaging,
paired with systemic symptom evaluation, could greatly enhance early and
accurate diagnosis.
The
Broader Picture: Misdiagnosis, Missed Opportunities, and the Need for Awareness
Dr. Letitia’s experience reveals how
systemic gaps in awareness perpetuate suffering. She recounts cases of children
misdiagnosed with psychiatric conditions, adults treated palliatively for
autoimmune disease, and neighbors with undiagnosed Lyme who deteriorated over
time. In her view, medical denial, outdated protocols, and underfunded research
create an environment where complex, chronic infections flourish unchecked.
She underscores that many patients
with autoimmune diseases such as Hashimoto’s or multiple sclerosis may be
harboring unresolved infections. Treatment targeting the immune system alone,
without addressing the root microbial triggers, may offer temporary relief but
not true resolution.
Dr. Letitia represents a growing cohort of clinicians committed to addressing the diagnostic blind spots of modern medicine. Her insights on Lyme disease challenge prevailing norms and demand a deeper, more nuanced understanding of infection, immunity, and chronic illness. Her integrative, patient-centered model—rooted in deep listening, precise history-taking, and evolving diagnostics—stands as a compelling template for the future of infectious disease care.
Dr. Jennifer Letitia is a progressive, integrative medical practitioner known for her comprehensive diagnostic approach and dedication to treating complex, multi-systemic illnesses. Her clinical work has focused intensively on chronic infectious diseases, environmental exposures, and neuroimmune dysfunction—domains where conventional medicine often falls short. Among the most elusive and controversial conditions she treats is Lyme disease. Through detailed clinical observation, evolving diagnostic strategies, and critical review of emerging science, Dr. Letitia offers a deeply informed critique of how Lyme disease is misunderstood, misdiagnosed, and mistreated in standard care settings.
