Did the Cold War-Era Department of Defense Weaponize Ticks with Lyme Disease?

For those of us aware of the massive amounts of money and attention directed by our government to study bioweapons-related defense (nearly $50 billion since 9/11), it is not that far-fetched to posit that Lyme disease might not be purely a consequence of nature but may also have roots in bio-weapons experimentation by our own US military. If true, the militarization of Lyme disease reframes it from a tragic natural epidemic impacting and debilitating roughly 476,000 Americans each year into a consequence of clandestine bioengineering. According to research into the topic, key military programs during the Cold War tested pathogens, like the Lyme bacterium, known as Borrelia burgdorferi, in tandem with parasitic vectors like ticks, often releasing them in fields, including at a high-contaminant biological warfare laboratory on Plum Island. If true, for those living with chronic Lyme disease, the weaponization theory is not just an origin theory—it may very well explain decades of institutional neglect.

Indeed, many patients suffering from Lyme disease report being systematically dismissed by healthcare providers who have minimized their suffering. It makes one think. If Lyme disease was entangled with classified military projects, the obvious becomes clear—the silence could have been not merely bureaucratic incompetence but strategic obfuscation—disease denial born of state secrecy. If this is the case, then scientifically, this forces a reconsideration of how certain pathogens evolve and spread. Moreover, experiments by the military—some involving gene manipulation and cross-species pathogen transfer—raise the possibility that modern Lyme strains may be more virulent or elusive due to bioengineering. This line of thinking certainly complicates treatment protocols and casts doubt on existing diagnostic models, which often fail to detect the disease in its chronic stages.

Shining a light on the Lyme disease conundrum was a book published in 2004. Authored by Michael C. Carroll and titled “Lab 257: The Disturbing Story of the Government’s Secret Plum Island Germ Laboratory,” the book played a pivotal role in the public’s perception surrounding Lyme disease, emphasizing that it may indeed be a result of undercover government experimentation gone awry. The book investigates the operations of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC), with particular focus on Building 257—a structure originally part of a US Army base, later converted for biological research.

In his book, Carroll weaves together government documents, personal interviews, and historical records to describe a facility rife with security lapses, questionable safety practices, and unclear agendas. Central to his claims is the idea that Plum Island conducted extensive experimentation on vectors like ticks, possibly in ways that overlap with the emergence of Lyme disease in nearby Connecticut. Carroll’s work asserts that tens of thousands of ticks were bred and experimented on at Plum Island, ostensibly as part of Cold War-era biological research programs. Though not entirely the same, the idea that the government weaponized ticks certainly doesn’t seem that far-fetched, considering DARPA’s involvement in mRNA technology decades before the pandemic.

Though direct documentation is sparse, Carroll suggests that these Plum Island programs may have involved pathogens and vectors in ways not fully disclosed to the public. Hmmm. His book details repeated infrastructure failures, such as waste leaks, ventilation breakdowns, and environmental breaches, implying that accidental releases of experimental materials—including potentially infected ticks—could have occurred. Given the geographic proximity of Plum Island to Lyme, Connecticut—the original epicenter of Lyme disease—and the timing of the disease’s emergence, Carroll argues that the correlation is too striking to ignore without further scrutiny.

Notably, Lab 257 does not claim definitive proof that Borrelia burgdorferi (again, the Lyme-causing bacterium) was created or engineered on Plum Island. Instead, the book raises a myriad of troubling questions: Were ticks infected on the island? Were they ever released, accidentally or otherwise? Was there a classified overlap between military biological programs and animal disease research? Carroll leaves room for interpretation, but the tone of the book strongly suggests that the official narrative omits key facts. These insinuations have fueled public demand for accountability and have inspired legislative action, such as Congressman Chris Smith’s efforts to mandate government investigations into historical bioweapons programs involving ticks.

Joe Rogan: "Lyme disease turns out was man made. Turns out there's a lot of real evidence that Lyme disease was weaponized, and that it leaked out of a lab called Plum Island.” pic.twitter.com/1aJImY4BRO

— Joe Rogan Podcast News (@joeroganhq) September 17, 2025

Along with uber-popular podcaster Joe Rogan, Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey has emerged as one of the few elected officials willing to give institutional voice to what many have quietly wondered for decades—that Lyme disease may not be a naturally occurring epidemic, but instead a consequence of covert biowarfare experimentation gone uncontained. For his part, Smith hasn’t simply alluded to the theory; he has taken it seriously enough to introduce formal Congressional amendments and push for a deep federal investigation. He did so again on September 11, 2025.

Back in 2019, Smith inserted language into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), directing the Department of Defense Inspector General to examine whether ticks or insects were ever weaponized between 1950 and 1975. This wasn’t hypothetical activism—it was an effort to pierce the cloak of Cold War secrecy. His inquiries were grounded in materials like Bitten by Kris Newby, which recounts the unguarded later-life disclosures of Dr. Willy Burgdorfer, the discoverer of the Lyme bacterium. Burgdorfer’s reflections—some on camera, some in private correspondence—suggested that he had participated in programs where ticks were “stuffed with pathogens,” evidently in research with combat implications.

But Smith’s pursuit to get to the bottom of Lyme disease has gone beyond anecdote or historical interest. His language has sharpened over time, and he has demanded clarity on whether these experiments were ever released—accidentally or otherwise—into the environment. He has asked who authorized them, what containment protocols were in place, and whether understanding this history might open new doors for today’s researchers in terms of treatment, diagnostics, and long-overdue legitimacy for chronic sufferers. These aren’t just questions of science—they are questions of ethics, accountability, and long-suppressed governmental memory. These questions, which are also in the purview of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., deserve answers.

Smith’s renewed pursuit for answers reopens the question of what transparency means in a biosecurity context. It challenges how our government handles secrecy, risk, and scientific ambiguity. Likewise, for those who have suffered from chronic Lyme—patients often ignored by mainstream medicine—the potential validation that their illness might trace back to covert experimentation is significant because it recasts the narrative, suggesting their often silent battle was not just against disease, but against denial. It reminds us that healing, when it comes to both our bodies and institutions, requires truth, transparency, and a willingness to face what has been hidden—no matter how uncomfortable that truth may be.