Cloud, your avatar was cute, but way too overstimulating for me, too. Thank you for for calming Mutley down for us! I had to check back on the negative serology- that comment about the percentage of false negatives was correct. I still think a serology test that picks up some XMRVs is very useful. From Cort's post on the Norwegian study:
"Dr. Mette Johnsgaard of The Lillestrom Health Clinic tested 24 patients and 3 healthy controls for XMRV using the culture test and found that 14 were positive. Of the negative tests, 11 were then retested with serology tests and 5 more positive results were found, bringing the total to 19 of 27. One of the positive serology samples was from a healthy control."
Serology will pick up some positives in people who are sick but may not have enough retrovirus circulating in the blood for detection by PCR/culture and in healthy people who may be at risk for getting activated infection at some point in the future. If culture alone detects GRVs in about 75 out of 100 cases, and you can find another 15 or so with serology, the two together are a pretty good pair. My infectious disease doctor told me years ago that with lyme disease, the antibody detection will fluctuate- the stronger the immune system becomes, the better you make and find the antibodies.