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!
The Pathway to Prevention (P2P) for ME/CFS: A Dangerous Process
Gabby Klein gives an overview of the P2P process, shedding light on the pitfalls with advice as to what we can do in protest ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Article: From the PCR Side: the Cooperative Diagnostics XMRV Interview with Dr. Brent Satterfield

Discussion in 'Phoenix Rising Articles' started by Phoenix Rising Team, Mar 17, 2011.

  1. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
    Thanks for that, gracenote... I forgot about that video... I was going to watch it but then I couldn't face sitting through 2 hours of video!
    But if it's worth watching, then I might try to.
     
  2. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,148
    Likes:
    2,847
    WA, USA
    yes, that plus something called a Fair Access Policy which limits how much video I can download... I would love to read it but that would mean a lot of work for someone or other (or a transcription software could be used perhaps)
     
  3. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
    Yes, I was hoping that there might be a transcription as well! But it would be a lot of work.
     
  4. gracenote

    gracenote All shall be well . . .

    Messages:
    1,508
    Likes:
    44
    Santa Rosa, CA
    If you're going to watch, Alter is first, then Gill, then Lo, and then the Q & A. I recommend you skip Gill if you don't want to be spurred into instant activism, although he is also in the Q & A part. You can view the slides separate from the video at the same link.
     
  5. lululowry

    lululowry Senior Member

    Messages:
    103
    Likes:
    0
    Athens, Georgia
    Satterfield is considered an expert?

    Satterfield finished his dissertation in December 2007. I assume he finished his PhD in 2008, the same year he started Cooperative Diagnostics. However, he gave what looks to be a grad student seminar at Arizona State University in 2009 ( http://www.bme.arizona.edu/Seminar/Schedules/seminar_fall09.php ) so his graduation date is unclear.

    The extent of his work with United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease, Department of Homeland Security, National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center is also unclear.

    He was awarded a Department of Homeland Security DHS education award in 2005 ( http://www.biodesign.asu.edu/news/reaves-earns-prestigious-homeland-security-honors ) to pursue his graduate studies.

    He did internships for one or more summers at Sandia National Laboratories.

    Here is Cort's account of this:
     
  6. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
    Thanks for the info lulu...
    Satterfield isn't interested in pursuing XMRV research so I'm going to focus my attention on those who are still doing XMRV research.
     
  7. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
    Thanks gracenote...
    I think I'll take your advice, and skip Gill to save myself some mental energy; I've had my fill of instant activism since the PACE trial was published!
     
  8. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,834
    Likes:
    4,728
    Ontario, Canada
    If Satterfield does not have enough expertise to make comments regarding XMRV, how on earth can all you people from the other forum who keep posting here say that Gerwyn's comments hold any water? Doesn't he have a PhD in psychology -- Satterfield's comments do have a lot of merit because he does have some pretty relevant education and experience if you choose to look it up.

    I think Satterfield has made some very good points. Trying to impugn the reputation of Satterfield does not make the comments any less true. The science will speak for itself.

    Thanks Cort for this thread and the Satterfield interview.
     
  9. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    441
    Raleigh, NC
    Actually you have Abbott labs - with probably the premier antibody development platform in the country on the other side as well. They ended up spending $50,000 a piece on macaques to develop their antibody test because they didn't feel they had a validated positive patient sample.

    They presumably know what they are doing. They created the first HIV antibody test. They are reportedly using their XMRV antibody test to do rapid testing of large numbers of blood samples now.

    So we have experts on both sides.....no surprise there! :)
     
  10. Forebearance

    Forebearance Senior Member

    Messages:
    395
    Likes:
    115
    Great Plains, US
    Thanks, Cort and Dr. Satterfield, for this interview.
    I want to find out the truth about XMRV and its relationship to ME/CFS, of course.
    It seems clear that Dr. Satterfield has the best of intentions and is well qualified in his field.

    I just have the feeling that XRMV is going to present some kind of paradigm shift.
    Even the smartest person and the most educated and competent person could miss some little detail that he didn't know mattered. Like refreezing a blood sample or etc.
     
  11. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
    http://videocast.nih.gov/Summary.asp?File=16477

    Demystifying Medicine - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Is there a virus?

    I've watched some of the video, and I've transcribed the most relevant section that I've watch so far.
    Some of Lo's presentation is a bit disjointed, towards the end of the quote, below, but the only places that i've missed out any text is in places where i've placed 3 dots (...).
    I've bolded the most relevant bits for this discussion.


    Shyh-Ching Lo presentation:

    [83.05]

    "So why did many studies have different findings? This is obviously a very challenging question...

    ...


    "...and the way the clinical sample is prepared, and the processing of this, all can make a difference.

    [83.45]

    And even more possible to me is that there is a variation of the PCR protocol, although everybody says we are following the same PCR assay, but if you look into all the detail, the cycles are different, [indiscernable] temperature slightly different, magnesium concentration slightly different;

    all of this, we really don't know how much that's going to make a difference.

    Today the topic is, is there a virus or not? is the virus responsible, or the causative agent of this, or not?

    That's all very far away at the present time because, when we are looking at this, we obviously are dealing with a very low rate [or 'grade'?] of infection - a very low copy number in the blood,

    and many of these difference can certainly result in the PCR disparities,

    and i just want to mention... the NIH obviously, the NHLBI's, is looking into this, and have this sample, coded sample, sent to different laboratories, and to test it,

    and this is the clinical [or 'critical'?] panel, the CDC's result,

    and obviously ... the four of the patients,

    and depends how the sample is being processed,

    how long the delay of the processing of the sample, and the results are obviously different;

    some are negative and some are positive,

    so this is obviously, they also continue to look into this and try to solve is there any processing of the sample make a difference?

    ..."
    [85.30]

    http://videocast.nih.gov/Summary.asp?File=16477

     
  12. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
    Here's more from the video... This is interesting...

    At [96.55]:

    Harvey and Lo sent two of their positive patient samples to the CDC who then couldn't detect the PMRV's in the samples.

    The CDC sent a blind coded negative control sample, from a single patient, to Harvey and Lo, which Harvey and Lo then repeatedly identified as positive, about 15 times. They repeatedly identified the same sample as being positive, even though it was blind coded. So Harvey and Lo detected PMRV in a 'negative control' from the CDC. Lo seems to be saying that this means it isn't a negative sample, but that the CDC just couldn't detect the virus in the sample.

    [My thoughts: if we are talking about contamination here, then it couldn't be in the sample itself, but must enter during the testing stage. But Harvey and Lo's consistent and repeated testing of the CDC's blinded negative control sample, as positive, suggests that it isn't contamination.]

    [99.10]

    Lo: "We are pushing to the very end of the sensitivity..."
     
  13. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,148
    Likes:
    2,847
    WA, USA
    very interesting, thanks very much Bob.
     
  14. carolinetanderson

    carolinetanderson

    Messages:
    15
    Likes:
    2
    Money interests

    I particularly appreciate how you pointed out at the beginning of the article how much Satterfield has invested in PCR. His entire career, livelihood and professional life is based around PCR. As he says, it's his profession.

    It doesn't appear he's looking for XMRV as much as he's looking to find XMRV only through his style of PCR testing.

    It's more like -- here's my method -- I can't find it -- there is no XMRV.
     
  15. Jim

    Jim Senior Member

    Messages:
    77
    Likes:
    0
    cort,

    do we know anything about what abbott labs is doing with their antibody test in regard to humans?
     
  16. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,910
    Likes:
    12,600
    South of England
  17. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    441
    Raleigh, NC
    All very interesting Bob - thanks for that

    I think Satterfield thinks that the PCR community has covered the most of the bases or contingencies, I guess you would say, now -too many to expect that XMRV is there and they can't find it.......and Harvey and Lo clearly think they haven't and that there are still little differences that could have caused the virus to evade detection......

    Of course there is XMRV AND the MLV's...lots of interesting stuff.

    Mikovits was just at Univ of Alberta training them in how to find it in their new lab - so they are going to be important players in all this as well.

    ....the next couple months are going to be fascinating. :)
     
  18. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    441
    Raleigh, NC
    Yes we do - they are using them for large-scale 'though-put' blood testing. I imagine this is why they spent the money on the macaques..I think its already started.

    From CROI

    X
     
  19. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    441
    Raleigh, NC
    Yes with the proviso that he's talking about methods that most people use to search for viruses now -ie PCR and antibodies...I think you're right - he is heavily invested in these techniques, he believes they are the best techniques in his opinion and if you can't find it using them - then he doesn't believe they are there. I think that is what he is asserting.
     
  20. garcia

    garcia Aristocrat Extraordinaire

    Messages:
    937
    Likes:
    105
    London, UK
    Brilliant observation Caroline!
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page