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: A disease at war with itself
We can all agree that ME/CFS is a nasty disease, particularly in its severe form, but there are abundant nasty diseases in the world. What is unique and particularly confounding about our disease is that so much controversy surrounds it, and not only surrounds it, but invades it too.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

CAA - WPI only lab reporting false positive result. (Is this correct?)

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by V99, Aug 1, 2010.

  1. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    Too right, arrrrrrrrrg woof. Bring on the next stage. Sorry, I'm not explaining well, and I'm not sure if I am confused, but I suspect I am.
  2. George

    George waitin' fer rabbits

    Messages:
    846
    Likes:
    44
    South Texas
    You are on this one issue. Trust me both the WPI and FDA got it wrong. You are right that the CAA needs to make the corroection though and that's what this thread is about right ?! (grins)
  3. V99

    V99 *****

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    1
    UK
    :Dwoof woof
  4. omerbasket

    omerbasket Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes:
    13
    I don't understand if you said "serology test" just for the joke (because of the delay in the serology test of VIP Dx.), or if you really thought it was a serology test that the WPI did in this blood panel - but to be sure, I will clarify again that it wasn't serology, it was qPCR.
  5. George

    George waitin' fer rabbits

    Messages:
    846
    Likes:
    44
    South Texas
    No I did not say it for a joke. Omer, I realize that you have an e-mail from Dr. Mikovits and that makes you the last word and authority on this subject however, I would like to point out that what you don't have is the actual information about the study itself. Neither do I.

    This was a titer test. They wanted to know if they could detect titers or viral loads. Now I could be wrong but you don't check titers with a qPCR test. I think we may both be missing information here.
  6. jspotila

    jspotila Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes:
    587
    As updated today, the CFIDS Association page on XMRV includes this statement about the FDA analytical panel results, "The Phase 1 study has its limitations and these results should not be extended to other published data."

    The Association did not state or intend to imply that the panel results (including the one unexplained false positive from WPI) had any bearing on the data in the Science paper. This is a misconception about the significance of the panel results. As I said earlier, there will be a summary of the meeting in this week's CFIDSLink, and the FDA is planning to post the presentations to its website in the near future.
  7. Dr. Yes

    Dr. Yes Shame on You

    Messages:
    867
    Likes:
    22
    Hi George,

    Actually, it appears from the table (if it does indeed say "copies" on the y-axis) and from Dr. Mikovits' email that the results in the table are for qPCR only; they are the results of assays for viral load via PCR, in copies of virus per unit blood. Each lab had to test their assay sensitivity with whole blood and plasma spiked with varying concentrations of plasmid (synthetic XMRV clone), using supposedly "negative" controls.

    What I don't understand is how they determined that those control blood samples contained no naturally occurring XMRV in the first place. That's why I'm not certain those false positives are necessarily 'false'.

    Copy numbers are used in PCR and other nucleic acid assays, not serological assays. Mikovits further confirmed that the test in question here was a qPCR test.

    Again, this was not a serology test. The VIP's serology test is an antibody test that has nothing to do with the nucleic acid assays used in the blurry table we are all staring at. Thus there is no evidence here that there is anything wrong with the VIP's serology test.

    As I mentioned previously, we don't know that until we know more about the processes by which they determined the samples to be XMRV negative, and I don't see how one could do that with absolute certainty, lacking fool-proof assays in the first place.

    Again, from everything we know at this point, this particular table appears to represent qPCR test results.
  8. George

    George waitin' fer rabbits

    Messages:
    846
    Likes:
    44
    South Texas
    Well, there ya go I'm totally out behind the bushes on this one. Huh, I guess nobody thought to test the blood for XMRV.
  9. omerbasket

    omerbasket Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes:
    13
    George, as Dr. Yes said - this table should represent qPCR. I'm not a scientist so therefore I don't know if you are right when what you say about not checking titers with qPCR, but you have talked about them wanting to know if they can detect viral loads. Now, since qPCR represents quantitive PCR, then I guess this test is performed in order to detect viral loads...
    Anyway. Dr. Mikovits said that this was qPCR, and I don't see a reason to doubt it.

    Edit: Now I read the whole message of Dr. Yes, and he really said it all with much more scientific knowledge than me... and I also saw that you now agree with us, George :Retro smile:

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page