No Verified Evidence That Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab Recorded a 50% Submission Spike in Spring 2026
“The Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab documented a 50 percent increase in tick submissions during March and April 2026, primarily from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh”
The argument in brief
A claim circulating online states that the Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab documented a 50% rise in tick submissions during March and April 2026, concentrated in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. No published report, press release, or public dataset from the lab, Pennsylvania state agencies, or the CDC supports this figure. The claim cannot be verified and may be fabricated or misattributed.
Why it spread
The claim is dressed in the language of official science — a real institution, a precise percentage, named cities, a specific timeframe. That combination feels authoritative and trustworthy. Add in widespread anxiety about Lyme disease and the habit of sharing seasonal health warnings quickly, and people pass it along without stopping to ask where the actual report is.
A specific-sounding claim has been circulating that the Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab at East Stroudsburg University recorded a 50% increase in tick submissions during March and April 2026, with most coming from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. The verdict is simple: this claim is unverifiable. No published evidence supports it.
The Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab is real. It operates at East Stroudsburg University, accepts tick submissions from the public, and does conduct genuine surveillance work. Pennsylvania state agencies and the CDC also track tick populations. But none of these institutions have published any report, data release, or press statement matching the specific details in this claim — not the 50% figure, not the March-April 2026 window, and not the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh breakdown.
Searches of the lab's official site, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection resources, and CDC tick surveillance data turn up nothing corroborating this statistic. That absence matters. A 50% regional surge would be significant public health news. If it were real and published, it would be easy to find and widely cited.
The strongest version of this claim might argue the data exists but hasn't been made public yet. That's possible — but an unpublished internal figure is not something anyone should be sharing as established fact. Until a source document is publicly available and attributable, the number should be treated as unconfirmed at best.
This kind of misinformation spreads because it mimics the look of legitimate public health reporting. Specific numbers, named institutions, and real geographic locations all signal credibility. But those details can just as easily be invented or distorted. Before sharing tick warnings or health statistics, check whether the original source document actually exists and is publicly linked.
Sources
- Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab (East Stroudsburg University)
The Pennsylvania Tick Research Lab at East Stroudsburg University does conduct tick surveillance and accepts public tick submissions, but no published report or press release documenting a 50% increase in submissions during March-April 2026 could be located as of the knowledge cutoff.
- Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection / PA Tick Surveillance
Pennsylvania state agencies track tick populations and disease risk, but no official state data confirming a 50% spike in tick submissions specifically in March-April 2026 from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh is publicly available or verifiable.
- CDC Tick Surveillance Program
The CDC maintains national tick surveillance data, but no federal dataset corroborating this specific claim about Pennsylvania tick submission increases in early 2026 is accessible within the available knowledge base.