Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Negative XMRV study - blood/brain/semen of Autistic Individuals

Discussion in 'XMRV Research and Replication Studies' started by Jemal, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. Jemal

    Jemal Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,031
    Likes:
    65
    Here is the next negative XMRV study. They looked for the virus in blood, brain (post-mortem), etc in autistic individuals. Also in the semen of their fathers.

    http://www.plosone.org/article/info...onid=6F4016946515F29A53051C40E29FE56E.ambra02

    Looks to be an Italian study.

    I am now going to listen to "It's raining men" on Youtube and replace the "men" with "negative studies".
     
  2. pine108kell

    pine108kell Senior Member

    Messages:
    144
    Likes:
    42
    IMO, based on other studies it is looking more and more unlikely that XMRV is linked with CFS. However, I do not think the lack of a link with autism would be considered a "negative" study for those with CFS. On the contrary, I've always felt that the long list of diseases WPI, and maybe a few others, was starting to link with XMRV made it more unlikely there was really a link.

    I would consider the above study a neutral result with respect to XMRV and CFS, but XMRV as a causitive agent is in trouble anyway.
     
  3. ukxmrv

    ukxmrv Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes:
    3,864
    London
    It's PCR again.

    They found MLV in control blood at 3.1 % - so why didn't they find any MLV in any of the ASD bloods?

    They used some nursing and medical students amoung the controls.

    The methods section is brief and sketchy.

    There is no mention of culturing the blood using Lncap

    Why do they bother doing this or publishing it?

    D- must try harder
     
  4. SOC

    SOC

    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes:
    16,429
    This bugger is hard to find -- or "these buggers" if we're looking at the whole lot. If XMRVs/PMLVs were easy to find, we'd have known about them long ago. I don't worry until a study finds approx the right proportion (4-10%) in a good size control group and the same proportion in an ME/CFS group.

    Finding different percentages in control and patient populations suggests either 1)non-optimal (how's that for diplomacy?) methodology, or 2)there's still some kind of correlation. If XMRV/PMLVs are a non-issue in ME/CFS, studies should be showing some infection in the general population and the same percentage of infection in PWCs. They wouldn't be able to distinguish between controls and patients with their data.

    These limited studies can be useful in that they take not-quite-random potshots at the problem and the results might give researchers some clues about the boundaries of the problem. They are very far from definitive -- and most don't claim to be. Our Brit "pals" tend to be the exception in that regard.

    Since this group used ASD patients rather than PWCs, this study is of limited use to us, personally. However, it may still help researchers define the boundaries of how, when, and where to look for XMRV, which may be of help to us in a more general way.

    No worries. :D
     
  5. Jemal

    Jemal Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,031
    Likes:
    65
    I fully agree. I personally believe the XMRV -> CFS link will turn out in the end. It just needs more research.
     
  6. eric_s

    eric_s Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,925
    Likes:
    75
    Switzerland/Spain (Valencia)
    I saw this one last night, when i was looking for the CSF study, but i didn't want to spoil the party :tongue:

    I don't care too much, because no matter what will happen with XMRV (and i'm still rather optimistic about it) there is still the CSF lead to follow. If there are abnormal proteins, it should be possible to find out why that is.
    Plus one of the CAA comments i read today said that sort of proteins is associated with fighting an infection... What a coincidence ;)

    And then Standford (Montoya) putting up the new website. I trust them to know what they are doing and if they think it's worth intensifying ME/CFS infection related work, that's a good sign to me.

    The "noise" coming out of other places that have so far not been able to produce much useful is not much more that that to me... noise.
     
  7. redo

    redo Senior Member

    Messages:
    837
    Likes:
    102
    This is actually one of the few studies where it's not just 0/n, but they have actually found something on some of the persons being tested " whereas peripheral blood samples of 3/97 (3.1%) controls were positive for MLV"
     
  8. omerbasket

    omerbasket Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes:
    13
    I doubt if it was any bother publishing it. I mean, look, they didn't even try to get the title and abstract right:
    "Lack of Infection"? Scientists, at least those who does not think they are god, doesn't say something is not there unless they have proven that it's not there. Not finding something is not a prove that it's not there. This is the first paper, I think, that uses this sentence, which no human being know if it's correct. They should have written: "Lack of Detction".

    I mean, what, didn't you read your own study?

    Beside that - does PLoS ONE even bother to read the studies they get before they accept and publish them?
     
  9. ChuckG

    ChuckG

    Messages:
    21
    Likes:
    3
    You did not include the complete quote for your second example. (Don't know why you bold quotes don't show up. Don't care why.) So you distort the author's conclusion.

     
  10. SOC

    SOC

    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes:
    16,429
    Sorry, I don't follow. It seems exactly like a 0/n study -- 0% in ASD and 3% in controls, hence 0/3. Am I missing something?
     
  11. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,118
    Likes:
    32,650
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    One of the problems with autism is it is probably a heterogenous condition, although I would not claim to know much about it so take my comment with caution. Sample bias alone could account for this. I think the WPI is going the other way, looking at XMRV in autistics who are already in families who are XMRV+. This is an automatic sampling bias.
     
  12. omerbasket

    omerbasket Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes:
    13
    Yes, You are right.
    I admmit, I didn't bother to read the study as well, just the abstract, and obviously not very carefully either. But it's not my study and I'm not an editor in a journal in which it is published.

    Anyway, the title is still misleading and pretty stupid for people scientists.
     
  13. markmc20001

    markmc20001 Guest

    Messages:
    877
    Likes:
    84
    They are going to release five bogus negative studies to every one positive study.

    Time for different tactics folks. Not about science anymore. It's about how to overthrow the Fascist totalitarian regime we are mistaking as democracy.

    Wake up people!
     
  14. ukxmrv

    ukxmrv Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes:
    3,864
    London
    I think that it was Dr Frank Ruscetti who said that there will be 100 failed papers until someone does a proper replication of the WPI methods.

    How about we start numbering these bogus studies until we actually get one that bothers to use the WPI methods? Then I hope they will be easier to bear for people getting discouraged.

    We could number them from the 2 UK papers that came out pretty quickly after the original Science paper. Let's see if we do get 100.
     
  15. free at last

    free at last Senior Member

    Messages:
    689
    Likes:
    224
    I think the BWG phase 3 should settle this once and for all, whats others opinon on that, is there any possiblitie that wont be the case for any reason ? Its is disheartening for sure, i hope Frank turns out to be right about the 100 failed studys. Whatever way you look at it, each negative study be it a WPI replication or not, is convincing the scientific world this is a bogus topic. unless something good happens soon i can only see things getting worse. if phase 3 goes against the wpi, then i think they will be dead in the water. unless of course Lipkin finds it. but why do i feel so strongly that he will not. Maybe the pattern just looks too set to belive he actualy might. and where the Hell has Ila Sing gone, shouldnt we be hearing something from her by now. Its as if shes dropped of the xmrv map, not a peep, not a comment nothing about deveploments of late. or how her studys are going or likely to be releasing results, why do i get the feeling, shes being quite for a reason ? like possibly things have not gone her way, and doesnt as yet want to upset the apple cart any further, for those who feel they can still prove there point. if ever we have needed a good strong positive study from a group not connected to the wpi, we surely need it now. If something goes wrong with the xmrv evidence, i will feel quite frankly lost on many levels. Maybe wrongly i have put too much faith in the xmrv idea, mainly because it just seemmed to fit my life so well. Of course its not over untill the fat lady sings. but all we keep hearing is a deafening silence. I know one thing ive said it before, and ill say it again. even if Judy is wrong, i still support her, at least she tried her hardest, to actually get to the bottom of this horrid disease, and least she stood up for us in belief. and at least just like Annette she actually seemed to give a damm about the patients. thats so much more than what most were willing to give us. But if it doesnt work out, i think everyone ( to my friends and family ) is once again going to look foolish. the damage will be immense. my self asteem ( and others here too ) will likely sink to new levels. For once cant something just go right for all of us, for our bodys and minds, and especially for our pride, just for once. to help right the wrongs of a injust health system the world over, havent we suffered enough. If god exists what more does he want from us. its just not fair. it just isnt. Untill such day as all crumbles to hell. I still support judy. But lately its getting very worrying to say the least.
     
  16. jace

    jace Off the fence

    Messages:
    855
    Likes:
    179
    England
    If the BWG get it wrong, it will not be settled. It's not about scorecards, it's about what is really happening on a bio-molecular level. HGRV's are recently discovered. It is early days yet.

    There has yet to be a single replication study of Lombardi et al's work. Not one. Nada. What we have had are arrogant, halfhearted attempts. May I remind you what Myra McClure said to Vincent Raciniello on TWIV 99 in September?
    And it is not hard to see why Myra had no positives. A quick PCR, indeed. MuLV-related retroviruses are hard to find. You need the right assays. The right annealing temperatures. All the rest, as laid out clearly in Mikovits et al (2010) and in Danielson et al (2010).

    The WPI are an independent organization, and if we get behind the Count Me In campaign, then nothing will stop them until they have the answers, whether it is XMRV or something different.

    If we rely on the NIH and the CAA (and in the UK, the NHS, AYME and the MRC) then we'll just remain in the hole we've been in for the last two or three decades.

    My two cents.
     
  17. cigana

    cigana Senior Member

    Messages:
    945
    Likes:
    750
    UK
    Completely agree.

    If they found it in 3/97 controls (3.1%), why didn't they find it in a similar number of ASD patients? Was it blinded or did they treat controls differently I wonder.
     
  18. August59

    August59 Daughters High School Graduation

    Messages:
    1,617
    Likes:
    624
    Upstate SC, USA
    It has been stated somewhere here in the past (on PR forum) that there are studies\papers completed, but they are trying to get them published, but positive XMRV studies are not a turn on to respectable journals right now.

    This whole publishing\journal thing really irritates the hell out of me. Maybe someone here can explain it in more detail??? Is it true that when a study\paper is completed that the author typically shops for a journal to print their paper and in fact pay the journal to do so? This process may result in a published paper or result in several attempts to different journals possibly with no luck. The paper may possibly be shelved until a change in trends or subject status becomes favorable with a highly possible chance that this never happens.

    My concerns:
    1) The researchers have put in the time to complete the study, which may hold crucial information to the health of sick patients, but in fact still have to pay for publishing if accepted or the results may never be known?

    2) If a study is paid for by a grant from a government entity and is then completed at a certain time. Is this information made public immediately upon completetion of peer review process?

    I'm probably confused between grant \ funded studies and privately funded studies. It just seems like there is something very wrong with part of the process if vital information is left on the table due subject popularity or researcher bias. Can someone explain the publishing process?

    Thank you!
     
  19. Glynis Steele

    Glynis Steele Senior Member

    Messages:
    404
    Likes:
    93
    Newcastle upon Tyne UK
    Ooh, good question August59, thanks for asking. Hope someone can answer this one. There was a study done a while ago, by a paediatric GI, on the use of antibiotics in autism, which the GI said was quite successful. However funding ran out before she could publish the results, which I think is a massive shame. There is only one other study regarding abx and autism, which was also successful, though when abx were stopped, symptoms returned. Again and as for CFS, not enough research into organic illness, and too much involvement from psych evaluation. Grrr!

    Glynis
     
  20. Xandoff

    Xandoff Michael

    Messages:
    293
    Likes:
    194
    Northern Vermont
    The World was flat for an awful long time after they discovered it wasn't. 2009 isn't that long ago in Science. I am XMRV positive and I am taking Valcyte and it is clearing my mind. I guess you might say that I am biased. Everyone who comments on XMRV is biased in one way or another. It doesn't bother me whether people believe it is or isn't a cause of CFS or just a biomarker.

    It feels right but only time will tell. Meanwhile I am moving forward as best as I can. I am not afraid of dropping of the edge of this world.
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page