1. Patients launch a $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!
Part 2: Brain Cells Making us Sick? Messed up microglia could be driving symptoms
Simon McGrath looks at theories that microglia, the brain's immune cells, might be overactive and driving the symptoms of ME/CFS and fibromyalgia.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Article: Four Viruses! Alter Paper Confirms Retroviral Findings in CFS

Discussion in 'Phoenix Rising Articles' started by Phoenix Rising Team, Aug 24, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    428
    Raleigh, NC
    If you have so many problems about my paper - calling it 'nonsense' and stating you can't read any further because its so bad and stating I'm missleading people and ' haven't even read the paper (for God's sake) and doing so in such a negative tone as to imply that I'm willfully misleading people - it sounds like you know alot more about this than I.

    Hence this

    You seem to know it all. I suggest that you start writing - write the paper you want to see and send it out. In fact after all these comments I challenge you to do that. You have very aggressive posts - you seem to think that you are telling like it is - you don't even try to be polite - its apparently so simple to you - I challenge you to put something on the matt instead of chiming in from the sidelines. How about it?
  2. awol

    awol *****

    Messages:
    417
    Likes:
    0
    True again, but Gerwyn's rebutal made some very important points.

    1) Other studies of gamma retroviruses have also been unable to detect the virus by unstimmulated PCR, in hosts known to be infected.
    2) PCR fails very easily if you are looking for the wrong sequence. All it takes is an extremely tiny variation, and variation is extremely common, geographically, person to person, and even within a single host.
    3) Neither their PCR nor their serology assays had established diagnostic sensitivity. In fact, they were unable to detect the virus in infected samples that the WPI sent them.
  3. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes:
    4,747
    Journalists sometimes get things wrong particularly about science - it is not like a peer reviewed article where one may take weeks to write it. It doesn't mean we should stop them writing. Cort has comment facilities at the bottom if people think there are mistakes. I think his articles are useful. If people think they can do better than Cort, they are welcome to write pieces.
  4. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    You are intentionally saying that these two studies come into conflict, they do not. Both findings can still be correct.

    What does that even mean? It's a nonsense statement.

    Which I have been pointing out to you, but somehow you still think that it's 'hardly likely that both findings are correct'.

    What you don't do is pretend that one of the studies has to be wrong. They can still both be right.
  5. Cloud

    Cloud Guest

    People will usually participate in constructive debate if done with respect. I see no reason feedback and debate on this article has to become hostile. Everyone wants to get the science right and appreciates it being interpreted correctly, but negative energy ruins it for some of us.

    Intellect and knowledge are fine as long they are accompanied by humility and care for one another....otherwise, it's just mental masturbation.
  6. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    I would never do such a ridiculous thing, because it would be misleading people, just like you are doing now. Its great that you write blogs Cort, keep doing it. But when you delve into technical details, you don't check your facts. It's not worth it. We need solid science right now, nothing else. We get the else from the other side.
  7. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes:
    4,747
    There could be lots of reasons. But given we have learned this week that Lo et al couldn't find them in the CDC samples they tested, the cohort issue seems a leading candidate.

    Hopefully more swaping of samples will go on in the future. This would seem a more straightforward issue than most research issues in CFS.
  8. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    Lo still has a few more samples to test form the CDC.
  9. pine108kell

    pine108kell Senior Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes:
    26
    Cort is trying his best to present the material to those who could not possibly understand the technical paper. I'm sure there are a few errors since even the scientists don't know that much--I found it interesting and thoughtful. Respectful debate would be appropriate if one disagrees. I find that Cort's analysis, while it necessarily contains speculation, contains less (and a lot more respectful thought) than your posts regarding it.
  10. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    Yes, I am absolutely trying to stamp out misinformation. I completely realise the implications that such a thing has right now. I will not take my time in writing comments on this, because to be frank, the more everyone here misunderstands the worse off we will be. I agree my posts have been blunt. But I have not had time to compose them. It's fair enough to say that he is trying his best, but you are not aware of the mistakes that are appearing. You think they are minor, but they are echoing the comments made by people like Myra McClure. We don't have the time to leave things hanging for more patients to read and misunderstand. The WPI are still regarded as producing an outstanding paper, the PNAS study supports that. We don't want them to stop research at this point.
  11. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    428
    Raleigh, NC
    Believe me V99 I am checking my facts right now. This entire sequence of events, I assure you, the writing the paper, getting comments on it, correcting whatever needs to be corrected will illuminate this topic far more than if the paper had never been written. I promise you that.

    It would be great at some point if you comment in less than such final terms such as 'you don't check your checks'; while I do miss a few I do check my facts and I do go to the original articles. Obviously I will make mistakes at times. Suggesting that I provide is what you get 'from the other source' is just so unfair and uncalled. Its clear who you are talking about - I am not them...I am not them - however much you desire to make me out to be.

    I would also note that I'm sure I make mistakes on both sides..that if people with certain persuasions were to read them they would, at times, be able to rip the pro-XMRV side to shreds.
  12. anciendaze

    anciendaze Senior Member

    Messages:
    832
    Likes:
    773
    While other points may seem to be narrow technical arguments, this is a fundamental weakness in design and conception of the negative studies. They tried to substitute artificial samples for clinical samples from infected humans to validate their assays. This is a major logical fallacy, forced by the belief that no infected humans exist. Since there are healthy people with infections, this does not require acceptance of anything concerning CFS.

    As for the samples WPI sent to the CDC, those were split. We haven't heard officially from the others in that investigation. Stay tuned!

    -----

    There appear to be many afraid the CDC will get off the hook on this one. I ask you to note who was at the press conference: not Reeves, not Switzer, not Ungar, but Steve Munroe, director of the division of high consequence pathogens. When things blow up four or five levels in a hierarchy, and someone from mahogany row has to take a public drubbing, you can be pretty sure the organization is aware that someone screwed up.

    Considering the number of nasty surprises for the CDC group looming in the near future, it will be very interesting to watch the fancy footwork from here on.
  13. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    Can I then ask, with all respect Cort that you do the checking first. Then post.

    I'm not sure what you mean by this? Are you talking about references? I do think you should start to provide them, especially when you post about technical details.

    I may be being harsh, but it's not about you. I have no reason to think of you in any particular way.

    The only persuasion I have is about getting good biomedical research for this disease. Nothing more or less. XMRV and other MLV's should be research to the bitter or happy end. It makes no difference. We cannot be cured, if the path is wrong. I'm sure you are not suggesting that you are anti-XMRV.
  14. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    428
    Raleigh, NC
    Here you go again - these kind of innuendo's that creep into your comments all the time....The WPI is still regarded as producing an outstanding paper. WHO SAID THEY DIDN'T?

    Who is saying stop research at this point? You are implying that my paper says stop the research! Where in the world does it say that?

    Here I stated Dr. Mikovits views: DId you miss that? Did Dr. McClure, whose comments I have not read, reference that?

    Or this?

  15. pine108kell

    pine108kell Senior Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes:
    26
    And you believe that the scientists working on this are going to base their work on this forum? Do you think an experienced scientist with the credentials of Alter and Lo care about what Cort or you think? I don't think you know as much as you pretend so you don't know the "mistakes" either. I'm done with this.
  16. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    Well said anciendaze
  17. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    No, but patients base their hopes on forums like this, and the media will use information here, so too will any health organisation that wants to say that the patients are not seeing these problems, so they don't have to do anything. Which mistakes?
  18. SironaL

    SironaL

    Messages:
    5
    Likes:
    0
    Leuven, Belgium
    I have entered the following search terms in pubmed to find this article:
    ("Retrovirology"[Journal]) AND Gerwyn
    ("Retrovirology"[Journal]) AND Gerwyn[Author]
    this search gives me no results. Can you give an accurate reference to this paper; date of publication, volume, issue, authors?
    Thanks a lot!
  19. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    428
    Raleigh, NC
    Here is how I have altered one section of the paper. V99 pointed this out and it made the paper stronger.

    Here is the major correction - its all about learning about the intricacies of nested PCR

  20. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes:
    4,747
    (Comment was directed at me but I thought I'd speed things up)
    You are right it isn't a published response. It doesn't have the status of something that comes up in PubMed.
    But it was accepted by the editor as a comment. It can be found along with other comments at: http://www.retrovirology.com/content/7/1/57/comments
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page