1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
A disease with two faces? Re-naming ME/CFS
Persuasion Smith covers the bases on the misleading and disreputable name for our disease we've all been saddled with ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Any news on Lipkin study?

Discussion in 'Media, Interviews, Blogs, Talks, Events about XMRV' started by Bevbh, Apr 27, 2012.

  1. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,791
    Likes:
    12,094
    South of England
    Yes, that's what I'm hoping as well... That they've been able to build on all of the stuff that's gone on since Lombardi, until now, and use all their most up-to-date knowledge... So I hope they looked for p-varieties... And avoided contamination pit-falls... Used the best methodologies, that avoided both contamination and false negatives... etc. etc. etc. With Judy and Lipkin in the driving seat, I have the feeling that it will be a thorough study, with no messing about. I hope so anyway.
     
    barbc56 likes this.
  2. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes:
    774
    This paper is interesting, Mula, because there is a group of ME patients who do not respond at all to rituximab and this paper suggests some reasons why ritux can have different effects where autoimmune disease takes a different pattern. Thanks for finding it.
     
  3. Mula

    Mula Senior Member

    Messages:
    131
    Likes:
    46
    It may be applicable, but MECFS is unable to achieve a similar purity of cohort that can be studied in isolation when selecting people with chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD).
     
  4. Christopher

    Christopher Senior Member

    Messages:
    479
    Likes:
    187
    Pennsylvania
    Eco,

    According to #1 here http://chronicfatigue.stanford.edu/about/projects.html

    Lipkin is involved in the Stanford pathogen study. Is that out of date or what?
     
  5. Mula

    Mula Senior Member

    Messages:
    131
    Likes:
    46
  6. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,791
    Likes:
    12,094
    South of England
    That's what I thought as well. But listening to his TWIV interview, it seems that he is looking for known and unknown pathogens, and that would include retroviruses if they are there to be found. It seems that it is a really comprehensive study that he is doing.

    The information that we are getting, about Lipkin's pathogen studies, is contradictory, so I'm a bit confused.
     
  7. Mula

    Mula Senior Member

    Messages:
    131
    Likes:
    46
    Deep sequencing technology won't be applied to the retroviral sequences, unless, perhaps, he has changed his mind post the results detecting fragments and serology?

    http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2011/09/15/applying-venture-philanthropy-to-chronic-fatigue-syndrome/
     
  8. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,791
    Likes:
    12,094
    South of England
    In his TWIV interview, he seemed to be suggesting that he will be implementing a number of methodologies which will result in a number of non-specific pathogen searches, looking for known and unknown pathogens. In other words, if I understood the limited information correctly, his methodology is such any pathogens present could potentially show up. So this would include potentially finding any retroviruses that are present. He has ruled out XMRV and pMLV being associated with ME, but that doesn't rule out other retroviruses. In any case, from the sound of what he's doing, if XMRV were to be present, it would show up. I can't remember if he specifically mentioned that retroviruses would be part of his pathogen search.

    I can't remember the exact details of his TWIV interview, and there wasn't much detail, so I might have misinterpreted some of it, but I was very impressed with what I heard.

    I think I'll listen to it again, or read a transcript.

    Does anyone know if there is a good transcript of the TWIV interview?
     
  9. Mula

    Mula Senior Member

    Messages:
    131
    Likes:
    46
    He has said xmrv is not one of the pathogens, and he would know because to look for a sequence his primers would need to target the suspected infectant. It is confusing to say pMLVs as this is a form of mouse virus, so would be reasonable to say he could find xenotropic MLV-related viruses which are not xmrv? It is unclear what his intentions are, but other pathogens tend not to need the level of amplification supplied by deep sequencing.
     
    SOC likes this.
  10. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,791
    Likes:
    12,094
    South of England
    I've just been listening to the press conference and Lipkin says that the samples are now being used for deep-sequencing testing, and he says that if there are retroviruses that he missed, he would hope to catch them in deep-sequencing testing. He specifically refers to retroviruses.

    I don't know which specific retroviral sequences they searched for because I haven't read the paper in detail.
    I assume that Harvey Alter would have looked for the p-variety of MLV-related virus that he detected in his previous study, however they are labelled/categorised. I don't know which sequences Judy and Frank Ruscetti looked for.
     
    currer and SOC like this.
  11. Mula

    Mula Senior Member

    Messages:
    131
    Likes:
    46
    It is not conducive to retroviral discovery if those patients were not the correct disease to begin with. Placing such a burden on a handful of people lowers the chances of discovery. Dr Alter and Dr Lo moved to another tests with pMLV primers, but it is not possible to know whether those tests could find those sequences previously identified. Dr Mikovits and Dr Ruscetti had primers as they used previously and found gag.
     
    RustyJ likes this.
  12. RustyJ

    RustyJ Contaminated Cell Line 'RustyJ'

    Messages:
    979
    Likes:
    479
    Noosaville, Aust
    I agree. I was dismayed to see they are using the same samples. Lipkin and the CAA, it seems, are moving to make these samples 'gold standard', to ensure they will be used in future studies. This means that if a study chooses not to use these samples it may be viewed as irrelevant. If there is a problem with this cohort, it will corrupt and skew me/cfs findings for many years to come.

    The CAA has never been behind retroviral findings, even before the negative studies came pouring in. The CAA has actively campaigned against HGRVs. It could be strongly argued that a retroviral discovery as the cause for me/cfs would make the CAA irrelevant.

    http://www.occupycfs.com/2012/09/22/thos...n-samples/
     
  13. jspotila

    jspotila Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,074
    Likes:
    609
    There are several sample repositories in the works. There's the Lipkin study samples. There's the CFI biobank. I think there is substantial overlap with the Lipkin cohort there, although I am not positive about that. And then there's the CFIDS Association's SolveCFS Biobank which is larger and different from the Lipkin cohort.

    I appreciate your link to my blog post on the Lipkin samples. I was disappointed to hear that NIH will not make funding available for work on that cohort, after what Lipkin said on TWiV.

    As far as the Association actively campaigning against HGRVs or that a retroviral cause would make the Association irrelevant, this is not the case. This has been hashed and rehashed on other threads. I'm no longer on the Association's Board, but I do know that they have a pathogen discovery project ongoing, plus a treatment screening study and more.
     
    JAH likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page