International ME/CFS and FM Awareness Day Is On May 12, 2018
Thomas Hennessy, Jr., selected May 12th to be our international awareness day back in 1992. He knew that May 12th had also been the birthday of Florence Nightingale. She was the English army nurse who helped to found the Red Cross as well as the first school of nursing in the world.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

XMRV and Culturing, HERV's and more

Discussion in 'XMRV Research and Replication Studies' started by kurt, Mar 23, 2010.

  1. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    i,m sorry you cant find the evidence but it is clearly in the paper there is no shift nothing changed

    so yes I am correcting you

    Dr M might have assumed that other virologists would actually read the paper and felt it unnessary to state the absolutely obvious. ALL latent phase viruses are incredibly hard to detect especially iof you dont look in the right place

    they did two lots of pcr i will post the details shortly and i will contextualise the other studies at the same time so that lay people can see the very plain differences
  2. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    It is a shame that i am also a qualified microbiologist as well then is it not---i dont think anyone else on this forum is . If you genuinely cant understand the concept of cell cell transfer I am sorry .I could not think of a simpler way of putting it. It means moving between a cell and another cell without need to go into the blood. I hope the soup is a little clearer now

    I have never stated that I have educated myself in Virology You must be confusing me with someone else

    You must pretty full of salt i would imagine!

    I am a little confused .Are you saying that you take Kurts comments as emmanating from a relevant professional? I think that he mentioned he was self taught in Biology

    You are quite right to be wary of random nutters on forums though it happens a lot
  3. Navid

    Navid Senior Member


    I appreciate Kurt and Gerwyn's post. Alot of the stuff goes right over my unscientific head....but they are really digging into the details of these studies and this disease.

    When their posts first started I was "on gerwyn's side" and felt pissy toward Kurt...why is he being such a downer..but the longer the uncertainty and unclarity remains around xmrv, the more it is in MY best interest to hear all sides of the story.

    Much of the "hearsay" Kurt talks about in his posts I have heard from several of my cfid's docs too. I have also heard the the PRO XMRV side from other docs. Yes, I see a lot of doc's...I'm working hard to get well. So there are many differing views out there still...and many unanswered questions.

    When i read gerwyn and kurt's posts they just confirm what i am hearing from my outside sources of cfid's info....

    i hope kurt has a thick skin and is not offended by some of the recent posts here...and keeps posting his viewpoint....i thought the post criticizing his tone was unnecessary and disrespectful...i don't notice a tone from kurt...just lots of hardwork and a presentation of an alternate view.

    and i hope gerwyn keeps posting his smart analysis too (strangely from gerwyn's user name i thought he was a she?!?!)

    thanks to both of you:victory:
  4. MEKoan

    MEKoan Senior Member

    Ok, totally out of my depth - totally - but, along with letting us know he was a microbiologist, didn't Gerwyn recently (last day or two) also explain some key issues and terms that clear up this culturing business? Was there not an issue with the different meanings of "amplification" for instance?

    I'm going on memory here, never a good idea with me, but I'm pretty sure I read all of this very recently and that it all made a great deal of sense.
  5. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    i will answer the questions about the pcr so everyone can see

    The comments about the culture and looking like the bug but not xmrv -priceless!
  6. Dr. Yes

    Dr. Yes Shame on You

    Hi Cort,

    It was my understanding that they DID activate (and culture) some cells prior to PCR, but not others. Certain subsets of cells were cultured with IL-2, others were not.. and then PCR was done. That's how I read the supplemental section anyway. Haven't figured out why they did it that way, but as I see above Gerwyn is planning to enlighten us on this subject. That should be entertaining.

    Sorry I haven't been able to respond much, my brain really is deep-fried lately, and I have lost the ability to sift through specialist methodologies (or probably even a Julia Child cookbook) of late. Besides, at this point we really are all speculating about the future; even if a seasoned retrovirologist was a forum member and we understood all the nuances of the studies perfectly, we would still have no indication of what will be coming out later this year.
  7. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Thanks - here the sections that I thought were relevant are again. (Sorry to do this again Dannybex - look away!! :)))

  8. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    correct spot on
  9. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    sure it is all there
  10. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Here's the section on activation of the primary cells.

    The next time primary cells are mentioned is here in the Viral transmission section:

    Here they talk about activated B-cells and XMRV proteins

  11. julius

    julius Watchoo lookin' at?

    1. go to phoenix rising website
    2. navigate to the forums main page
    3. click on any thread.... will find a ton of positive rumours about XMRV. ;)
  12. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    Its really not clear to me. The activation section is below the PCR section. Activated cells are not noted in connection with the PCR yet they are in other sections. Why point out that cells are activated on one section and not another? Did they use the primary cells for the PCR? Or did they just used the PBMC's as stated? What are primary cells? Does that denote something in particular?

    They used PBMC's for the PCR; in the activation section they talk about splitting up the cells into their types - but they didn't do that for the PCR; they simply refer to PBMC's.

    Note that it says the cells were either stored as unactivated cells for further culture or resuspended in Trizol for DNA and RNA extraction; ie one set of cells was cultured; the other set of cells was not - the uncultured cells were used for DNA and RNA extraction. I don't know how else to read that.

  13. oerganix

    oerganix Senior Member

    Yes, it seems to me that Gerwyn or someone else has patiently explained or countered every item, then someone has doggedly circled round the block and brought it up again and again. I don't know if that means they didn't understand the explanation, or they just didn't like the inference.

    And FWIW, I don't need anyone to keep me from getting "too hopeful" (whatever that is) or to keep my feet on the ground. No need to save me from myself. I feel insulted and talked down to if anyone is posting negative speculation on XMRV just to keep me from getting too excited about it. Like Adam, the rumors and speculations I've seen here have been predominately negative on XMRV. Of course, if there is some real science that disproves WPIs preliminary study, bring it on. None has appeared so far.

    And to describe any of Dr Mikovits's statements, at least those I'm aware of, as "lamblasting" anyone is hyperbole itself. Dr Vernon's speculation, if what Cort says of her is true, that purported flaws in WPIs study might somehow lower the interest of the rest of the scientific community in XMRV just isn't supportable by the facts. There are studies on XMRV going on all over the world. Governments, private researchers and BigPharma are all interested, no matter whether the criticisms of WPI are born out or proven to be more smoke.

    What I am seeing is that whenever someone expresses a hopeful sentiment, there are some who then express a negative speculation, even when the hopeful sentiment was qualified with the acknowledgement that we don't know anything for sure. That feels like an attempt to squelch hope and I don't think that's helpful or healthy.
  14. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    it is 2 times 10 to the power of 7 cells further culture or ANALYSIS
  15. Gerwyn

    Gerwyn Guest

    i think that dr m was merely expressing her feelings when proffessional scientists seemed incapable of following relatively simple instructions
  16. Kati

    Kati Patient in training

    What Organix said. Bang on.
  17. noddyboddy


    Maryland, USA
    I had Shingle when I was 9, and have had chicken pox more than 14 times. My health deteriorated and I was sick all the time after shingles. I appear to have been a normal child before that. (Although I did have pneumonia at 7.) It was after shingle I had the endless sore throats, swollen glands, headache, fatigue, and no apparent explanation. Can you tell me more about the chicken pox virus in connection with CFS, or where to look for more information?

    I've been able to gradually improve my physical fitness and other bodily processes, but my brain is still in a fog. I really want my brain back!
  18. jackie

    jackie Senior Member

    Hi Noddyboddy! The best I can do for you is send you to where I've looked for info - which is one of Dr. Chia's sites..."EVMED research". Lots of info re Enteroviruses (coxsackie/echos etc.) and also VZV (cause of Shingles)....and his theories about their connection to me/cfs.

    Interesting, although I was a very "sickly" child (pneumonia before I was 6 wks. old)...I didn't get Chickenpox until much older than normal - 16...and my first shingles about 4 years ago - about the time I started antivirals. I certainly sympathize with what YOU went through as a child!

    I wish I knew how to give links or better yet, post the entire site here for informational purposes...but I haven't learned how! (so much for my "improved" mem/cog!)

    Seriously, I credit my long term use of antivirals with an improvement (at times dramatic) in my Brain fog!...I only wish my body would catch up (and no more chronic shingles would also be nice!)

  19. kurt

    kurt Senior Member

    Syracuse, Utah, USA
    Thank-you to those who have answered my request for input on whether you want to hear more about HERVs, alternative hypothesis for XMRV, etc. What I gather from the responses is that it is split, some are interested and some do not think it is helpful. Kim mentioned the CFS population is strong enough to deal with the eventual outcomes if XMRV fails, although others disagreed. I sense in the conflict over just talking about possible problems with the XMRV studies, that the CFS population is not uniformly resilient. And also several have requested to separate speculation from fact more clearly. That is a good idea I think for everyone.

    I need to take a rest from all this for awhile, so will probably not post as much the next few days. However, I want to reply to Gerwyn's repeated statements that there is no in vitro evidence for the points I made. There is good evidence, but I have not always provided quotes, expecting people would google search the issues I raise, but probably many are too tired for that. So I will try to look up these items and give quotes or references more often. Actually, I did give 'in vitro' evidence for the emerging hypthesis that HERVs are involved in disease, including work by Huber for HERV K18 in CFS, and a new study in MS showing differential HERV W expression between MS tissue samples and controls. And there is plenty of 'in vitro' evidence of HERV cross-reactivity, including with MuLV, in the 'Rumor Viruses' article I included. That is a long .pdf article and probably I need to hunt down some specific quotes. Someone else is welcome also to work through that article and find the evidence, it is there, over 500 study references!

    Gerwyn, you stated that you are a qualified microbiologist. Would you please clarify what that means? I have some idea in the US, but maybe that should be more clear to everyone here given the level of analysis you provide. For example, here in the US that could mean several things, from a technician with a bachelor's degree running culture machines and operating a microscope in a hospital lab, to a PhD researcher in a laboratory conducting original studies. And probably several steps in between. And a second question, do you have formal training in virology beyond the introductory level? (some may not realize that virology is not necessarily part of microbiology, at least in the US, a distinct specialty) Thanks.
  20. Dr. Yes

    Dr. Yes Shame on You

    Hi Noddybuddy,

    Here's the link to the site Jackie mentioned:

    (thanks for telling us about the site, Jackie! I didn't know about it til now.. )

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page