- Messages
- 13,774
I know that this is in the 'XMRV' section, so we're more likely to get answers from people with an on-going interest in XMRV, but I'm interested to see what posters on this forum think. I've set up a poll, but I'm interested to see some comments as well as just have people vote.
PS: I had a bit of a problem phrasing the question, as 'causes' is more stringent than I wanted to be, 'is related to' sounds too weak. You could think of it as asking 'How likely do you think it is that most people with CFS/ME (defined by which ever criteria you think is most appropriate) suffer from an HMRV infection that was detected by the WPI, while most healthy controls do not?'
I've been increasingly sceptical about XMRV for some time, and now think it's pretty dead. There are still a few unanswered questions, and that Ruscetti thinks it's worth continuing research makes me think that something could be going on, or they may have a hint at a virus other than XMRV... but the evidence against the 2009 Science paper has been piling up for some time, and the results from the BWG really undermine what I thought was the most important part of that paper - that they had a test which could reasonably detect whether blood samples came from CFS patients, or healthy controls.
edit: I think that I'm in the 0-1% category - it's a long shot, but I'm still holding out a bit of hope.
PS: I had a bit of a problem phrasing the question, as 'causes' is more stringent than I wanted to be, 'is related to' sounds too weak. You could think of it as asking 'How likely do you think it is that most people with CFS/ME (defined by which ever criteria you think is most appropriate) suffer from an HMRV infection that was detected by the WPI, while most healthy controls do not?'
I've been increasingly sceptical about XMRV for some time, and now think it's pretty dead. There are still a few unanswered questions, and that Ruscetti thinks it's worth continuing research makes me think that something could be going on, or they may have a hint at a virus other than XMRV... but the evidence against the 2009 Science paper has been piling up for some time, and the results from the BWG really undermine what I thought was the most important part of that paper - that they had a test which could reasonably detect whether blood samples came from CFS patients, or healthy controls.
edit: I think that I'm in the 0-1% category - it's a long shot, but I'm still holding out a bit of hope.