Bob
Senior Member
- Messages
- 16,455
- Location
- England (south coast)
Thanks Sam
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.
Yes, but like I said, perhaps they don't know when the XMRV culture was misplaced. It's possible, based on the wording in his article that (for instance) the XMRV culture was immediately misplaced after they had received it from I presume Silverman, which would have happened in late 2007. When someone used it for an experiment in March of 2009, it was noted down from which ice chest it was taken, which turned out to be the chest containing patient samples.
I am not saying that this definitely happened - I am just saying that dismissing this information as irrelevant to the Lombardi study seems premature to me.
Hi Currer well they wasnt contaminated in that freezer at the wpi then on this occassion was they ?Hi free thanks for putting up this question.
I have just checked my IiME DVD from June 2011 and Dr Mikovits says that independent phlebotomists were sent to carefully selected patients, the samples were prepared at the NCI aliquoted and frozen and sent to three independent laboratories (who prefer to remain nameless so they are not attacked) (audience laughter), and the results were 65% positive.
Hi Currer well they wasnt contaminated in that freezer at the wpi then on this occassion was they ?
Those that were mobile were told to go to ashford hospital. ( that included me ) the others had home visits. just to clarify.
But all had viral like symptoms from onset and met strict criteria. It seems if contamination was causing these readings it appears to be everywhere doesnt it.
Suggesting if it is ( was contamination ) in this seperate ( seperate from just the WPI lab ) then some other form of contamination must be at the heart of this ? Or what ?
Are you saying Dr Mikovits changed her mind currer on what she was finding ? because i was told i tested postive 3 out of the 4 methods used for xmrv. But was not told if all 3 labs got that same result, and how closely the results matched between all 3. If they matched closely. ( would have been a good question to ask her ) seems strange that the contamination ( if thats what it was ? ) was the same in all 3 labs ? more questions i know. But i hope they are good ones. Not sure what Dr Miller thinks of these particular questions. But would be interested on hes view.
Sorry for going off topic somewhat. But thought this might all be relevant to the contamination statement by Dr Mikovits in some way.
I find it shocking that XMRV could jump from a culture dish to vials of blood in a freezer!
I thought there were three labs that drew the blood but the samples were all tested at WPI?
I thought there were three labs that drew the blood but the samples were all tested at WPI?
If a paper is not published it's most likely because it didn't get past peer review or wasn't up to standard requirements to be published.Conspiracy theories are a too simplistic way of dismissing a theory as situations are really more complicated than that. Stronger proof is needed.
I need a citation for the Ashford study if someone has one. I will also keep looking.
XMRV appears to be too hot to handle, for whatever reasons.
But science will out!!
But it's "just" a feeling on your part Barb though, isn't it?
You haven't seen the Ashford paper or any of the papers that Dr Mikovits said she had in her drawer and couldn't get published.
Are you saying that all the "negative" XMRV papers are better than ones that Dr Mikovits and Dr Ruschetti would have produced. We don't have any data to make that judgement and it's all opinions.
Not a perfect fit, but I'm reminded of a quote from Keynes. Science will out in the long run, but:
"The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead."