- Messages
- 73
I just posted on CFS Central. Klein answered the question about XMRV's infectivity rate.
Mindy Kitei
CFS Central
http://www.cfscentral.com
Mindy Kitei
CFS Central
http://www.cfscentral.com
A retrovirus does not leave the body
He's not saying that their XMRV is current or latent, he's saying they have been infected at some point.
That's how I took it too.
So from me personally, thank you Drs. Klein and Silverman for your hard work on XMRV and the connections to prostate cancer and CFIDS. They will never read my thank you - but at least I know I've thanked them.
Indeed, thanks to the doctors for their interest and hard work.
I would like to better understand though, how one can have any type of 'prior infection' in the case of a retrovirus, which, by definition, reverse transcribes it's RNA into DNA and then inserts itself into the host cell's DNA which then produces more copies of itself when the cell divides, and therefore results in permanent infection. This isn't new information, the first time I actually heard this was on the Dr. Oz show months and months ago. This show is aimed at the general public. Is there something new about the basic nature of retroviruses we haven't heard? Is it possible XMRV is not a retrovirus? If not, then what is it? :worried: Could it be that the doctor meant to say merely that it's easier to find the antibodies in peripheral blood than it is to find actual virus? That would actually make more sense to me.
Is this a latency issue? Can a retrovirus be latent?
Why use the word 'prior' at all if the infection is still there To use it seems to imply something.
On the cusp of getting legitimacy for active XMRV, we face a battle for recognition of those with latent XMRV.