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!
Nitric oxide and its possible implication in ME/CFS (Part 1 of 2)
Andrew Gladman explores the current and historic hypotheses relating to nitric oxide problems in ME/CFS. Part 1 of a 2-part series puts nitric oxide under the microscope and explores what it is, what it does and why it is so frequently discussed in the world of ME/CFS. Part 1 focuses...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

German study finds xmrv

Discussion in 'XMRV Research and Replication Studies' started by bel canto, May 18, 2010.

  1. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    A lot of people who have been given a diagnosis of ME/cfs dont have it. diagnosed by oxford criterea CCC ME/cfs=0 XMRV=0
  2. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    there are a lot of variables involved in whether a person who contracts XMRV goes on to develop ME or some other illness.It is complex but in essence it depends where it lands in the DNA.It could quite happily do nothing if not in a regulatory gene.
    If in aregulatory gene then different effects are possible depending on the gene titre and system infected. It could be IBS,or endometriosis or elevated rssting heart rate,achlorohydria asthma etc more serious MS type symptoms are possible a bit like having on two or more symptoms of ME.cancer is possible and likely.But will everyone with XMRV get ME-NO.Will they have some health issues yes but if lucky management by palliative measures or not too debilitating All human retrovirus are pathogenic it just depends on the level of pathology they induce
  3. omerbasket

    omerbasket Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes:
    13
    I don't understand, Gerwyn. You say: "It could quite happily do nothing if not in a regulatory gene" but than you say "Will everyone with XMRV... have some health issues? Yes".
    And besides, does people with HIV that don't have AIDS have health issues? If not - why do you think that everyone with XMRV will have health issues?
  4. leaves

    leaves Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes:
    15
    That makes sense; my mum has asthma , allergies etc.
  5. lansbergen

    lansbergen Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes:
    498
    I think when it is inserted in a place in the chromosome where it does not interfere with the proper working of the cell and is not activated it could just sitting there without giving symptoms.
  6. Robyn

    Robyn *****

    Messages:
    180
    Likes:
    0
    Maybe they should test our saliva next.
  7. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes:
    1,936
    Sofa, UK
    That's a very good general piece of advice on this forum.

    I have been guilty of insensitivity myself in the past here; sometimes in our excited theorising and speculating on here it's easy to forget that there are many real people out there like us, and in different and even worse situations than ourselves, and that we will each deal with the unfolding snippets of news in different ways. We all need to try to be sensitive as we speculate; and at the same time, when frightened by the prospect of bad or frightening news, we should all hold tight and remember that nothing is certain yet, there is much more yet to be uncovered, and how this will all unfold in the next few years, for good or ill, nobody knows.

    We are all naturally speculating here, and that sometimes means facing our fears - gently, together. Suggested attitude: Mindful of the worst, hopeful of the best.
  8. bullybeef

    bullybeef Senior Member

    Messages:
    476
    Likes:
    44
    North West, England, UK
  9. eric_s

    eric_s Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,925
    Likes:
    73
    Switzerland/Spain (Valencia)
    Lol. You are driving me crazy :cool:. But i don't want to start a discussion again, so i won't talk about this on and on.

    Some people were worrying about what will happen if the general public starts to become aware of XMRV and XMRV is actually dangerous. Since there is no certainty yet about which illnesses XMRV causes, the only way we can try to answer what will happen, is to make some thoughts based on assumptions. This is a CFS forum, so people here only have to be worried if XMRV and CFS are associated, because if that's not the case, most people here will not be XMRV positive.

    I think the assumption of a prevalence of XMRV in the population of developped countries of 3% is a pretty good guess (we had the Science study, now this RKI study and the Japanese Red Cross values). If in healthy controls it's between 2 and 4%, then it will also be somewhere in that region (a bit higher of course, but probably not much) in the general poplulation. Or what percentage of the gerenal population do you think won't qualify as healthy controls (are not healthy)? Give them 100% XMRV positivity (which is too high as not every health problem is caused by XMRV or leads to XMRV positivity) and you can calculate how much higher than the 2 to 4% the prevalence in the general population can be at maximum.
    Make a better guess, if you like, i'd like to hear. If it's higher than 3% that will mean less trouble for the XMRV positive people, because the more there are, the less possible it's to stigmatize them.

    I also think the assumption of 0.3% of the population of developped countries having CFS is pretty safe. That would be ~1 million in the USA. Sometimes we hear even higher estimates.

    I don't think you can say that 97% of the people diagnosed with CFS according to the CCC have XMRV.
    From the WPI we have heard numbers as high as 99%, but you can't give an exact number since XMRV tests have not been done in large enough numbers around the world and are not reliable enough yet.
    But for my calculation it does not matter anyway, because i was calculating for the (until now) hypothetical case, that XMRV is the cause of CFS. And in this case it will be 100% of XMRV positivity in true CFS cases, the others will have been misdiagnosed.

    CFS has been around for how long? Around 25 years? So if it's caused by XMRV, which is probably the only case in which people here really have to worry about being percieved as dangerous, then, unless CFS develops a very long time after the XMRV infection, we can say that XMRV is not easily transmitted, because if it were, we would have tons of cases where one person in a couple or family has had CFS and later the other person/other family members got/have gotten ill too. Like in HIV, where it could clearly be seen that it's infectious, even though it's much less easy to transmit than influenza or other illnesses.
  10. bullybeef

    bullybeef Senior Member

    Messages:
    476
    Likes:
    44
    North West, England, UK
    I did read on here somewhere that overall global prevalence was ~6%. It was in an email someone posted.
  11. Mithriel

    Mithriel Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    Likes:
    40
    Scotland
    I have just found this thread so I am commenting on the whole thing rather than any particular post if you see what I mean.

    XMRV is not a very active virus. It doesn't replicate very much at all. A single individual contains HIV with more genetic variability than all the XMRV studied so far. That is why the techniques for finding HIV do not work for XMRV. It has to be coaxed to replicate then cultured before it is present in enough numbers to be isolated by PCR. (I am sure someone on the forum pointed out that the negative prostate cancer studies used a tissue culture that is not very effective for XMRV. Now that they know what one to use it could explain why this German study has been able to find it.)

    I feel this low replication explains a lot of ME/CFS. There is not enough in any one tissue to become obviously diseased. The immune system is most affected but not to the extent you get with HIV ans it is still low key. It is enough to make us ill but is not enough to be obvious in the usual tests.

    Our varying symptoms could easily be because having XMRV means that other infections, like ebv, parvo, coxsackie B, can get a hold.

    In the eighties, the theory was that ME was caused by a retrovirus + genetic susceptibility + a virus like Coxsackie B.

    Healthy controls may be lacking the virulent viruses that work with XMRV to give ME or it could be that their XMRV just replicates so slowly that there is never enough to make them very ill, or like Gerwyn says they are lucky enough that the virus doesn't attach itself to an important gene.

    The slow replication rate means that it will not often be present in large enough numbers to be infective. Many of us have been ill for decades without any one else in the family becoming ill.

    Is bone marrow not one of the places the WPI isolated XMRV. Bone marrow might need to be screened as well. I don't carry a donor card. I wonder if immunosupressant drugs might actually slow XMRV replication.

    Oh, and I was a healthy, clean living fourteen year old when I became ill :Retro smile:

    Mithriel
  12. omerbasket

    omerbasket Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes:
    13
    When the Science study was published, Dr. Coffin wrote an article titled: "New virus, How many old diseases?" (or something like that...). As I think of it, I think XMRV might be the cause for many diseases, including ME/CFS, prostate cancer, other cancers (perhaps lymphoma and/or leukemia), fibromyalgia, autism, gulf war syndrome, MS or at least some cases of MS and who knows what (in the following diseases, XMRV was found in different numbers of cohorts in studies: ME/CFS, prostate cancer, fibromyalgia, autism and some atypical cases of MS - so it might not be just my imagination).

    Another thing I think about: I think a very good study to see the infectivity of XMRV would be to take people who are XMRV positive and to test their families for XMRV. Now, if you want to see if XMRV is transsmisble in every-day's-activity - meaning via saliva, urine, sweat etc., you would probably want to test families in which you know that one of the children have XMRV (but you didn't already test anyone else from that family), and that is because you don't want to focus on cases were there is a reasonable chance that XMRV have been transsmited during sex that the child was born with XMRV. I think that would be an interesting kind of study, a pretty easy one to make (relatively) and that would be able to tell us a lot of things quickly, before approaching to the scientific experiments that might be harder to do and that the conclusions from them might be more difficult.
  13. IamME

    IamME Too sick for an identity

    Messages:
    110
    Likes:
    5
    So I'm Mr insensitive now, am I? What about my feelings or is whomever gets in first? I feel Leaves has overreacted and left me feeling as if cast as some sort of board villain! I don't see why it should be my responsibility how someone else feels whether it's 10, 20 50, 80 or 99% of +XMRV people *could* go on to get ME/CFS or not. These are all possibilities, some likely and some no doubt extremeley unlikely -- and depending as I say on how a new CFS or XAND is defined as well -- if people don't want to consider these possibilities they shouldn't be reading scary research papers and discussing it on this thread, and certainly not trying to censor other people's ideas (even if they're silly!) As well as being responsible to each other we also have to be responsible to our own limits after all. Both my parents are dead and had multiple serious autoimmune diseases. We don't know what the exact significances of having XMRV are yet. I'm feeling quite hurt and taken aback about all this.
  14. cfs since 1998

    cfs since 1998 *****

    Messages:
    577
    Likes:
    4
    I just want to make a quick comment about the higher percentage of XMRV in the immunosuppressed patients. These are patients that had undergone bone marrow or organ transplant. Rather than thinking that the immune suppression made them more susceptible to the virus, I think one possible explanation is that some of them became infected with XMRV during their transplants. This would basically double the XMRV prevalence among transplant recipients.
  15. eric_s

    eric_s Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,925
    Likes:
    73
    Switzerland/Spain (Valencia)
    Thanks. If you can find the source, that would be interesting. In this case the result of the same calculation would be that at least 1 out of 18 people who are XMRV positive get CFS. So it would be a bit less scary to the public, but i guess still scary enough, especially when considering that a certain percentage of the other 17 persons might still get other illnesses. But i'm fully aware that my calculation was really only a very quick and simple attempt to get to a guess about the dangerousness and perception in the public of XMRV.
  16. leaves

    leaves Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes:
    15
    I dont want to censor your ideas and I want you to feel welcome in the Forums, and I certainly dont want you to be hurt. Please do not take this as personal criticism. What you said hit me in the face. Maybe it was an overreaction, but that is how I reacted, and I frankly dont think it is such a strange reaction either. I dont think I told you that you should not be free to express your views, i merely pointed out that these theories were both not likely and not in the same category as "discussing the weather". I am sorry for having made you feel bad, that was not my intention.

  17. eric_s

    eric_s Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,925
    Likes:
    73
    Switzerland/Spain (Valencia)
    I read that a lot and i also know that some people (mostly in North America, i think) try to treat those infections. But then, why can't those infections be diagnosed? Or can they?
    In my case, for example, doctors told me that they can see that i've had EBV, but from the type of antibodies that were found, they could also say that the infection must have occurred at least 6 months in the past. They never found an accute infection. Is this the case in others? Active viruses?
    Because in this case that would be a criterion that allows to distinguish at least some PWCFS from healthy persons. I'm sure in this case there would have been studies that have found that in PWCFS there are more of those viruses present than in the average population. And this would have ended the "is CFS physical" discussion long time ago.
  18. cfs since 1998

    cfs since 1998 *****

    Messages:
    577
    Likes:
    4
    I just did a quick statistical analysis. I combined the subjects into two groups; those that had received a transplant in one group, and everyone else in another group. The p-value of the XMRV prevalence between them was 0.02, meaning that the higher prevalence in the transplant recipient group is statistically significant and unlikely to be due to random chance. Then I cut XMRV prevalance in the transplant group in half, to represent the idea that half of them were infected upon receiving their transplants. The p-value was then 0.53, which is not statistically significant. So the hypothesis I posted above is consistent with the statistical data from the study.
  19. Koan

    Koan Be the change.

    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes:
    55
    Hi IamME

    I totally get where you're coming from. I think we have fallen victim to anxiety at your expense. I don't think you were doing anything that most of us weren't doing but, perhaps, you came along at a critical juncture for Leaves. It happens.

    I'm sorry you were hurt, IamME. It's not easy to deal with such scary, unsettling and intimate things without having the occasional dust up.

    I know how it is to feel really anxious, Leaves. This isn't easy, is it!

    Peace out,
    Koan
  20. Cookie Monster

    Cookie Monster

    Messages:
    76
    Likes:
    0
    This was pretty much my feeling too - although i said its likely treble the prevalence in transplant patients since if you have a transplanted organ i think its also likely you will also be given some transfused blood too from the blood supply (unlikely the blood & organ would come from the same source/donor).

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page