Currer
oh I agree that this damn illness causes psychiatric problems, as noted in my post under "symptoms" other day
it's a NEURALOGICAL and chronic illness that causes pain and nasty symptoms, so it would be bloody remarkable if it didn't cause serious personality and memory issues
Lyme for example carries extremely high risk of driving untreated folk to suicide/self harm...no one but an appallingly ignorant or evil person would suggest that is a "psychological illness" though
Same with rabies, syphilis and many others such as surprsingly, bladder infections often seriosuly affect the mind, also, toxins, such as mercury ("mad hatters disease")
Alex
yes, this is NOT buried!
as I said, look at the incredible load of CRAP that went on about HIV research, that was ridiculous behaviour etc between research groups, ugh
Never mind the uttelry VILE, depsicable bigotry and COWARDICE the US government especially showed, Reagan buried his friend Rock Hudson and still not much was done because AIDS was reviled as a disease of "
god cursed deviants"..O M G!!! how backward
Likewise, ME/CFS disease has, IMHO, been deliberately manuipulated to the press and public ot appear to be fraudulent, a "
mental disease of "malingerers and hysterical women who jsut need a slap in the face"...this is classic, brilliant, effective but evil misdirection
Such attitudes also imbed themselves in researchers! researchers are *HUMAN* and fall prey to Human foibles like anyone. Many though are hopefully enlightened enough to see through such, or intellectucally interested to learn the actual facts.
Also, this affects research, with HIV no one wanted to touch a "gay plague", so they had trouble getting funds...same with us.
I'll explain this again to those who think "
they are out to get us" (yes they are, lol)
there's no "Illuminanti" trying to bump us off, but there IS a web of vested interests who want us to die off, to go away, to stop costing them money or drawing attention to somehting they want hidden.
they can and will affect research, by not funding some researchers who may find the truth, or funding those they think will not.
So this weights the odds against us.
Again though, most researchers are honest. But the funding issue can massively skew things to look worse than they are.
If only 2 researchers who can find (+) XMRV issues are funded, but 20 researchers who can fined (-) XMRV research are funded...does that really mean XMRV is not real? it's statistcally skewed so it's hard ot tell the scientific "truth"
For example, during the 50s/60s even early 70s, the tobacco companies had utterly evil, foul schemes to skew research and public opinion on the dangers of smoking. (I cna go get links if need, to back this up)
they could fund an honest researcher, even without them knowing it, who the tobacco companies felt their research would show little or no harm
others they outright bribed, even if the researcher believed themselves honest, the huge grants etc naturally skewed their findings because they wanted to not upset their patron....
please go read up on psychological warfare, the Public Relations and advertizing companies, and the insane and enormous programs of public manipulation the East and West got up to in the Cold War and afterwards many from that crap started to sell their tricks to corporations and governments.
Ever seen the film "They Live"? simplistic and humourous but has a damn good point: we're bought and sold, manipulated, from day we are born (though it's not a bunch of aliens, lol).
http://www.dvdactive.com/images/reviews/screenshot/2009/4/theylivebdcap3.jpg
In an ideal world, all research would be completely neutral, pharma corps would be banned as monstrous parasites and mass murderers (hey if you fake safety studies and folk die for profit...WTH else is it then?), and governments would ring fence and be seperated from chosing what gets researched, leaving it to committees of experts, except in crisis...things could be so much better.
All honest research is needed, even inf negative, because science works by DISPROVING things, not by "proving" them.
Alas, we do have reason to be skeptical and worried, and all that and illness = paranoia :/
neither side though has right to be 100% sure (on any science issue actually), too much evidence supports XMRV as a live virus for it to be ignored, but the negatives do have points. IMHO, it's about 90% (+) for XMRV for a few reasons, but it's still very early days so it's a "narrow 90%". I could be wrong. It's when folk think they cannot be wrong *at all* we get problems.
Sherlock Holmes said:
"If we reject the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth!"