New WPI and CDC XMRV sequences in genbank

Yes, I agree that XMRV could not 'evolve' into PMRV, or vica versa, in the time frames that we are talking about.

I'm not sure if I understand exactly what you mean here RRM, but isn't it the case that not many full sequences have been carried out, so we only have a partial picture of exactly what MLVs/MRVs have allegedly been detected in humans?

http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Retroviruses.html?id=Awcmfx8EaOAC&redir_esc=y
Retroviruses. John Coffin. Google books.

Mechanisms and Factors that Influence High Frequency Retroviral Recombination
Krista Delviks-Frankenberry,1 Andrea Galli,2,3 Olga Nikolaitchik,2 Helene Mens,4 Vinay K. Pathak,1 and Wei-Shau Hu2
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3187697/

some reading material.

Dr Snyderman wrote in December that the integration study of his blood revealed a virus integrated at a site unlike a site where XMRV integrates.

The deep sequencing studies have not been done even though a sample was sent because the lab pulled out of the research.

We need further research to show what viral strains (if any) are present in patients.
Everyone who follows this research in an unbiased way knows that the search has to be broadened to look for other MLV strains and that restricting the debate to "XMRV" is an artificial diversion from the real issue.

It is a shame that labs are afraid to do deep sequencing studies in these circumstances.

Thanks currer... There's only about 800 pages in that book!!!

We have enough time, right?
Some of you could almost be getting degrees in virology by now I think...

Well, if we all sat the same retrovirology exam, do you think we might be able to answer one or two questions between us? lol

If the questions were about XMRV? Sure

Let me illustrate with yet another example. Twelve men have walked on the moon. Suppose all took ground samples and turned out to be (moon) rock. Now, you could still argue as follows:

"Where these men have walked reflects less than 1% of the moon's surface. Therefore it's still entirely possible that the moon is primarily made of cheese."

While this is theoretically possible, it's more like a "hypothesis between the observational gaps", so to say. It lacks experimental evidence. If the hypothesis were true, you would expect that one of the men that walked the moon would have accidentally stumbled upon the predominant cheese surface. And even disregarding this, the hypothesis lacks any evidence in support of it.

The same really applies here.

It is true that there are really only partial MLV/MRV sequences available. Most are about 5% of the (assumed) length of the full virus. So you could hypothesize that the "unkown" parts reflect parts of XMRV or of other strains of MLV/MRV that have been found in blood samples.

While this hypothesis can be theoretically true, it lacks experimental evidence. There have been multiple partial strains sequenced. You would expect to see some evidence of (recent) recombinational patterns in at least some of the reported partial sequences if recombination was truly the driving factor for the sequence diversity.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/HM119591.1

Have we had this reference posted? MLV related JHK HUMAN retrovirus?

It will take a massive political shift in western society to acknowledge the collateral damage you mention, Mark, because the current system is still highly profitable for the "winners".

I have to admit to some serious doubts about virology as a profession, too - they experiment on animals, create unnatural and lethal viruses which can earn them millions, many work in secret biological/bioweapons research, treat the public with disdain and suspicion...how right or ethical is this? And can we really assume that "good" can result from such activities - is it even right to benefit from technologies developed in such ways?

OK we have "conquered" polio and TB, but we have swopped them for AIDS and ME and autism. Perhaps this is not the way to progress. Can your civilisation genuinely progress if its actions are immoral? Dont you just exchange one form of suffering for another?

Especially since WHO CDC and other regulatory agencies have been well aware of the risks and actual confirmed instances of contamination of biologicals by those agents, MulVs included, for quite some time. The push to explain these contaminants away as harmless to humans is nothing new, it is just playing out on a bigger scale and more out in the open this time around.

Really? I find this statement puzzling. Virology has helped us conquer polio as well as other diseases. Do you want to go back to those times? I have two friends who contacted polio when I was growing up. One died. The other has post polio syndrome. Even though I was very young at the time, I remember having to stay inside, the pools closing down. I would think many here would be too young to remember this, but it was scary.

What are the instances of the confirmed instances of contamination of biologicals? Not saying there aren't any, but I have to say I have missed this.

One thing I have always wondered about is some say that lab workers are tested for XMRV/whatever but think it's because the labs are afraid people will catch something. Couldn't it be the other way around? Since the lab workers have been in various labs, and xmrv is a very prevalent contaminant, might they carry the contaminate unknowingly into the lab and that's why they are tested, though tbh, I don't know how often testing of lab workers happens.

Both?

As far as biological weapons, I think that is always possible just as many Satellites are used for spying. I am not sure what the real world consequences are of this and wonder if this was more prevalent during the cold war before scientiest were more accountable. However, since then we have had the war in Iraq, so who knows? Would I be surprised there is something like this happening? No.

But just because this is possible I'm not sure what the odds it could be an explanation for our illness. I would think there would be other, more logical reasons. Think occam's razor.

Barb C. :>)

Thanks currer for reminding us of what is important. JHK-3 is an X-MRV. Whether it is XMRV is a non-issue in light of recent events. I am concerned more with finding a cure for my illness, not scoring points in some technical debate which not only does nothing to further the search for a cause, but retards further progress.

This debate is not new. There have been moves in the UK to tighten up regulations, because of perceived problems (although cynically, the measures seemed to be more about managing public reactions). I think that in any area of science there is pushing of ethical boundaries, particularly when commercial interests are involved. I think it is an important debate to have. These sorts of questions need to be asked. To say otherwise is a little naive.

Hi Mark,

Thank you for taking the time and effort to respond to the concerns raised. It's really appreciated. You've been fair, thorough, thoughtful and balanced, as always.

I hope i was careful in my own posts to separate genuine forum members who have legitimate concerns about XMRV, from people who I consider to be on the forum purely to energetically promote a certain point of view against XMRV (people who have no legitimate interest in ME). There have been quite a number of the latter type of members who have been removed from the forum over the past six months, so I think that my public complaints about these type of members are valid.

I do acknowledge that it is impossible to make a public forum perfect for everybody's use, and I am grateful for the continuous hard work that the mod team all put into making the forum better. But after feeling like i had experienced harassment which led to me taking a break from the forum, I thought it was fair to publicly share my perspective on the subject, at least once. I don't usually publicly vent like that, but I felt I needed to say it. I hope my posts were perceived as constructive, although I was having a bit of a rant, so maybe they weren't as balanced as they could have been. And maybe my perspective is too one-sided because I come from a place of being receptive and enthusiastic about XMRV research.

Personally, I would really welcome a respectful discussion, from both sides of the XMRV argument, and I wouldn't have a problem with that at all. But unfortunately it hasn't felt at all respectful over the past few months, from my perspective, due to a small number of energetic posters. But I hope that the discussion we've now had about this subject will help both sides of the debate have a bit more awareness of each others' concerns, and that it will help us all to consider each other a bit more and to continue the respectful discussion that we've had recently in this thread.

Thanks for the reminder to always report posts that we have an issue with.

Morning Mark,

From my own perspective, I have only been aware of such issues in the past two years simply because of the publication of Lombardi and the connection to my condition.

Once that was 'out of the bag' only then did I begin looking back at other issues of which I had not been aware. I think in that respect it was natural for me at least to think these issues pertaining to contamination and/or murine infection were something new, that 'science' became more focused as a result of Lombardi.

To some limited extent I still think this is true - to judge by the number of papers on the subject at any rate - and perhaps murine infections have come into the spotlight. But that is not to say 'science' was not aware of them before and their potential.

I may sound naive and even silly but I do believe in and trust science - but it is for them - as it is for us - a learning curve and new studies cast more light on things that hadn't been considered in as much depth previously (or indeed may contradict previous research). Each new paper sheds more light on past papers and past understanding - you know how it goes - and this is one reason why I am reluctant to ever conclude anything definitive from a single paper alone.

Science hasn't closed the door on any of this - if anything I think they have increased their efforts - a single paper or even papers might not stand up to the test of time; but that's science!

Science will continue to study XMRV and any other identified murine retrovirus; they will keep looking for others currently unknown; and - should human infection be confirmed - they will have a far better understanding as a result.

My interest - apart from breaking up the monotony of my existence - and a genuine desire to learn - is to remain abreast of developments IN CASE human infection is ever confirmed.

Of course everyone's interest will be heightened again if a paper is forthcoming linking any of this to our condition I suspect - for now though it is less of a focus I would imagine.

Mark, thank you for your post. I just did what you recommended.

Part of the problem lies with some people thinking that anyone who disagrees with another person is inherently being disrespectful. Not talking about either side particularly, but have to be honest that I have seen posts where people are complaining about another person's opinion but did not see any disrespect.

I know you and I disagree with a lot of things but probably agree as many of us, more than not on issues of respect, an open forum and realizing that not everyone is going to have the same perspective on topics. Issues are not just black and white but somewhere in the grays.

People's personal perspective and how it affects others is a hard issue to moderate. One persons respect may be seen as disrespect by others simply on the basis of opposing opinions. It doesn't have to be that way. Kudos to you and the other mods.

I have also been attacked and no one, whatever side(s) you are on, deserve to be treated that way.

Barb C.:>)

There is a whole long thread on this forum somewhere, with lots of documents posted, go look in the Testing folder. Or could be in this folder...

I have been thinking about government acceptance of a new global plague, and how this could cause differing countries relationships could become frayed.


If the majority of Europe and North America have private healthcare and welfare systems, so in some way, a global plague could be accepted eventually, but what happens when a country has a "free" healthcare/welfare system or a National Health Service?


If UK had a NHS during the turn of the 20th century during the influenza outbreak, the costs to government would have been astronomical, particularly at the time after WWI there was a global depression back then. So what happens if a new, long term epidemic is brought to the governments attentions, and countries with national healthcare systems are reluctant to accept it, particualarly during another global economic depression?


Would this cause relationship problems for countries on opposing sides of eventual acceptance based upon their healthcare and welfare systems?


In our case, we have seen much of the anti HGRV debate stem from the UK. Much of the denialism and contamination accusations first came from the UK. The swiftness of the UKs attack on XMRV spoke volumes for me, based upon their reluctance to accept the situation and ramifications, but is this much of a surprise? And could a time come were capitalism demands cashing in on a chronic epidemic, which would leave the likes of the UK hung and dry?


Or should a new human retrovirus be accepted by some countries, could this cause the likes of the UK attempt to say it doesn't travel like HTLV to avoid monetary cost to treat the potentially infected?