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!
ME/CFS and the Magic of the Canine Factor
There's been plenty of research indicating that having pets is good for your health. I never really noticed any particular benefits to having cats, though that may have had more to do with my cats. They've been fairly indifferent to my presence and we've shared a live-and-let-live...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Blood Products Advisory Committee Meeting Announcement (BPAC) December 14-15, 2010

Discussion in 'Media, Interviews, Blogs, Talks, Events about XMRV' started by Otis, Nov 26, 2010.

  1. floydguy

    floydguy Senior Member

    Messages:
    650
    Likes:
    238
    I believe it's been discussed before that Bell's patients are not really recovered. The "recovered" people have been able to figure out how to be somewhat functional but are in no way recovered.
  2. Marco

    Marco Old blackguard

    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes:
    821
    Near Cognac, France
    Didn't miss it Bob. But if the participants were confused as to just what they were voting on, as has been suggested, the FDA are under no obligation to accept the recommendation.

    I hope not and am happy to accept the result regardless.;)
  3. Marco

    Marco Old blackguard

    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes:
    821
    Near Cognac, France
    Thanks Val.

    Scrub my last post. Too impatient to answer and too afraid that I'd forget what I wanted to say while catching up with the rest of the thread.
  4. eric_s

    eric_s Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,925
    Likes:
    73
    Switzerland/Spain (Valencia)
    Thanks a lot Val, it was interesting to get more details about the BWG phase II results.
  5. Valb626

    Valb626

    Messages:
    39
    Likes:
    0
    Oh, another thing I wanted to mention was that, by the time they got to the discussion of the other 3 questions on the agenda, which didn't require a vote, the meeting had already gone over by about 1.5 hours. So, those questions didn't get much attention/discussion, as everyone was more than ready to leave by then.
  6. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Val has posted the slides on ME/CFS Forums and gave us permission to repost - so no sneaking around this time :cool::cool:.

    This gives us the why and what of the studies

  7. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Here are the 4 samples - all positives as identified by the WPI - an important point...


  8. George

    George waitin' fer rabbits

    Messages:
    846
    Likes:
    44
    South Texas
    Val this includes the question about banning the Prostate Cancer Patients?? Do you think it was remanded to the next day or just skipped through??? I haven't found anything regarding PC patients being defered or banned in any of the news papers and I googled for that. Did I miss it??? Anybody else find the info on that one way or another??

    I read through the slides you posted and Thank You again from the bottom of my little doggy heart.

    Is it just me or are we completely lacking anything like a structure and the results are a mish mash. I was under the impression according to the presentation at CFSAC that the point was to create a "gold standard" test and the labs would test both their test and the "gold standard" and see who was better (?) or at least the most accurate.

    That all seems to have gone completely out the window.

    What are some other people's takes on this information??

    And I am completley floored on the number of samples used. I'm thinking that either who ever designed this was drinking heavily or maybe I need to take up drinking heavily so that I can understand the idea process involved here! (and I am so not grining right now!)
  9. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Thanks for the on site review. I'm not sure what they were thinking was going to happen there...they squeezed, as conferences often do, the peakers into their little slots - I don't think they left much time for discussion. It would have been great to have taken questions from the audience as well......We always want more...

    You know what I would really like? A debate - questions posed before hand and after - between say, Dr. Stoye and Dr. Ruscetti. They'd probably tell each other "I'll meet you outside in the parking lot afterwards"

    But still that would just lay everything out in the open.....Don't they do that in retrovirology??? That's not part of the agenda???
  10. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    You can see why they picked these patients: they had mostly consistently tested positive using a variety of methods..

  11. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    This is just interesting.... remember it was the CDC that was unable to find any XM RV in the samples the WPI sent to them just prior to publishing their study. This time some of the samples tested positive for the gag protein on two separate days..and most of them tested positive on another test. Yet they all tested negative using the DNA/RNA test.

    The CDC was really close on two tests to the WPI! (that calls for a smiley I rarely use) :Sign Good Job::Sign Good Job: I know everyone dislikes the CDC - but it looks like they are playing straight science here and really everyone has an incentive to do so because no one nows what the other labs are going to find; which is a nice incentive to try and get this right. You can see from this why Switzer would say he really doesn't know what's going on.

  12. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Now here's the WPI :D:D:D:D

    Thankfully their results were mostly consistent but not always. They were mostly consistent on days 2 and 4. They couldn't find anything on day zero. This is one reason why the WPI does multiple tests - it doesn't always show up.

  13. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Now here's the WPI :D:D:D:D

    Thankfully their results were mostly consistent but not always. They were mostly consistent on days 2 and 4. They couldn't find anything on day zero. This is one reason why the WPI does multiple tests - it doesn't always show up.

    On the other hand they appear to have been unblinded - that suggests they sent them samples the WPI stated were positive and said now see if they are positive again......which seems crazy... why not throw a bunch of other samples in there and asked them to test them???

    The WPI, on the other hand, seems to have done an honest job of it....

  14. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    National Cancer Institute :mask::mask::mask::mask:

    Couldn't find it at all! Remember they are all just looking for the XMRV gag sequence via PCR....

    We have the very odd scenario of the CDC been able to find XMRV and the NCI not being able to find it :confused:. So the group that was able to find it now can't, and the group that wasn't able to find it now can. Love it!!!

    Just another day at work...


  15. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Conclusions - as Val notes, the only lab that couldn't find is unblinded - so now they have to worry about the blinding factor - and we have to wonder why they didn't stick a few more samples in there - so they wouldn't have to worry about the blinding factor?? Arrgghhhhhhhhhhh! :Retro mad::Retro mad:this is why

    I really want to know about that.....The way the results turned out could be interpreted as - blinding made a difference. Isn't blinding the first thing they do at this level? Critics took the WPI to task for not stating that they blinded their samples...and here the guys that are supposed to clear up the mess are not blinding their samples???

    I wonder what the explanation for this is???

  16. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    Phase IIB

    This is a nice setup..These samples never kissed the WPI's doorstep - so this is how they test if theres contamination at the WPI or at least in those original samples. If these samples turn up negative - then you have to start to think that these people don't have XMRV but their samples do....bad news.

    On the other hand - its just for people isn't it and we know that sometimes it takes multiple blood draws to XMRV. We do know that most of these people have had their blood tested several times and WPI can consistently find it in their blood. What we on't know if their blood is being drawn several times or if the WPI has looked in the same sample several times. Hopefully it's the first.

    This time EVERYTHING is blinded. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

    This is clearly a more important test than IIA.

  17. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    National Cancer Institute :D:D:D

    The NCI, of course, was a co-author of the original paper.

    They are still simply looking for the gag sequence - this was the main finding in the Science paper.

    They didn't find anything at all
    - :eek::eek: - that's not good. Gag is apparently the most trustworthy sequence, but when they actually went to the putatively positive patients and got their blood they couldn't find it...On the other hand they didn't find it the first time either, which makes one wonder why they would be able to find it now. :rolleyes::rolleyes:..

    The NCI did not validate the gag findings in the original paper - the Cleveland Clinic did.

    But they couldn't find them now.

    (If this was the CDC everybody would be howling - unfortunately it's not - this bug, for the umpteenth time, is not easy....).


  18. Valb626

    Valb626

    Messages:
    39
    Likes:
    0
    One of the questions I have and hope we get an answer to tomorrow is whether NCI/DRP is different from NCI/Ruscetti (on a later slide re: serology results).

    So confusing STILL!
  19. anciendaze

    anciendaze Senior Member

    Messages:
    855
    Likes:
    861
    This subject was particularly interesting. We have reports going back to DeFreitas' work that their strongest test results came either from people who were completely asymptomatic, or in remission. The problem of controls turning into patients, which suggests transmission, has plagued the field from the beginning.
  20. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Messages:
    7,025
    Likes:
    432
    Raleigh, NC
    The CDC :eek::eek:

    They were able to find XMRV at times in the samples sent directly from the WPI. Now can they find them in samples directly from the patients. If they do they validate the WPI's findings...if they don't that boosts the contamination theory....

    They found nothing...

    Thus far the gag sequence is not working out....

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page