You can view the page at http://www.forums.aboutmecfs.org/content.php?85-XMRV-CFS-Check-Check-Check
-
Welcome to Phoenix Rising!
Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.
To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.
Article: XMRV and CFS - Check, Check, Check?
- Thread starter Phoenix Rising Team
- Start date
I know that was positive. But I want to be more positive.
Dr. Enlander recommended comparison blinded tests also. I think that if the other labs aren't culturing the virus first to make the levels detectable, it's pointless to set up any comparison studies with them, and gives them more attention. I think the other labs are saying "let's try it our way'. And unfortunately it doesn't work. We should start the counting over again when a study cultures the virus.
WPI is going the extra mile, they applied more methods. They're going in more depth in many different directions. And it's because they have the independent funding and mission. In one of the videos Dr. Mikovits said they will be looking at the small variations that were found in the viruses of the positive patients. I think we should just be patient and keep supporting WPI. We are so lucky to have a group that can keep following the trail and not stop after one study. The drug studies are going to matter the most to us patients.
Even if more retroviruses get discovered down the line it's going to come out of this. Or if an AIDS drug works for some unknown reason. The science community might like it, but a quick thumbs up, thumbs down for DeFreitas killed the research.
Dr. Enlander recommended comparison blinded tests also. I think that if the other labs aren't culturing the virus first to make the levels detectable, it's pointless to set up any comparison studies with them, and gives them more attention. I think the other labs are saying "let's try it our way'. And unfortunately it doesn't work. We should start the counting over again when a study cultures the virus.
WPI is going the extra mile, they applied more methods. They're going in more depth in many different directions. And it's because they have the independent funding and mission. In one of the videos Dr. Mikovits said they will be looking at the small variations that were found in the viruses of the positive patients. I think we should just be patient and keep supporting WPI. We are so lucky to have a group that can keep following the trail and not stop after one study. The drug studies are going to matter the most to us patients.
Even if more retroviruses get discovered down the line it's going to come out of this. Or if an AIDS drug works for some unknown reason. The science community might like it, but a quick thumbs up, thumbs down for DeFreitas killed the research.
Well put. I agree with the counting over again when a study cultures the virus. At least for me, based on what I've heard - that will be a demarcation point - that's when, all things being equal (rest of the study is OK) we'll know. Even a 10 or 20% positive rate would be a good starting place - just no more zero's, not with culture studies. You gotta think a culture study is just around the corner.
I'm not a trained virology person but I've had CFIDS for over 40 years.. long suffering but I've made the best of it.. It seems to me that the studies that came up with no XMRV where useing PCR blood scanning. XMRV is not frequent in the blood.. I believe that it is the antibodies that show a titer to the virus.. The other studies did not base their outcomes of antibodies to XMRV.. I've had 4 doctors over the past four decades tell me they see weird looking white lymphocetes once in awhile in my blood..( Only once in awhile!) Yet my natural killer cell function is dyregulated much like HIV but not to that devastaton..CD 3/ CD4 ratio to T 8 supressor cells.. WHERE DO XMRV VIRUS'S COME FROM.. THYMUS, BONE MARROW.. THIS IS WHERE THE NATURAL KILLER CELLS ARE MANUFACTURED!! XMRV ALSO INFECTS THESE ORGANS.. LYMPH NODES, SEXUAL ORGANS, SOME VEINS .
NOW WE HAVE LOW NATURAL KILLER CELL FUNCTION WHICH ALLOWS LATENT HERPES VIRUS'S TO EXPLODE.. ALL OF THE HERPES LATENT VIRUS'S HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF CAUSES ALL THE THE SYMPTOMS OF CFIDS! HERPES HAS RECEPTOR'S ON THE BRAIN !
I'm staying firm with the retro viral cause.. Always have felt it was like HIV but not as devastating.. Anyone wanna write me.. As you can see, I've come along way baby.. but I remember when I couldn't think, write and would lose my way..severely ill...
NOW WE HAVE LOW NATURAL KILLER CELL FUNCTION WHICH ALLOWS LATENT HERPES VIRUS'S TO EXPLODE.. ALL OF THE HERPES LATENT VIRUS'S HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF CAUSES ALL THE THE SYMPTOMS OF CFIDS! HERPES HAS RECEPTOR'S ON THE BRAIN !
I'm staying firm with the retro viral cause.. Always have felt it was like HIV but not as devastating.. Anyone wanna write me.. As you can see, I've come along way baby.. but I remember when I couldn't think, write and would lose my way..severely ill...
From above:
<<One way is that the antibody test was not specific for XMRV which means it could have been reacting to another mouse virus. Until we get a better antibody test this must remain in the realm of possibility. >>
Even if it is another virus, other than XMRV, these findingsare still highly significant. They demonstrate infection with SOME virus, specific to CFS/ME patients. And if it not XMRV, then the (presumably monoclonal antibody) reagent tha they are using could be used to isolate and identify it.
But with the isolation of living virus, capable of infecting human cells and multiplying in them, I am firmly convinced that XMRV (or a subtype of XMRV), is involved.
<<One way is that the antibody test was not specific for XMRV which means it could have been reacting to another mouse virus. Until we get a better antibody test this must remain in the realm of possibility. >>
Even if it is another virus, other than XMRV, these findingsare still highly significant. They demonstrate infection with SOME virus, specific to CFS/ME patients. And if it not XMRV, then the (presumably monoclonal antibody) reagent tha they are using could be used to isolate and identify it.
But with the isolation of living virus, capable of infecting human cells and multiplying in them, I am firmly convinced that XMRV (or a subtype of XMRV), is involved.