I'd have loved to get more news on the CDC replication attempt than this. It sounds like they're still working together though.
I wasn't able to watch this. Was there any info on why PCR detection rates are so much lower than culture (I probably won't understand any explanation given, but it would be nice to try)? Any hints on when we might have these findings confirmed by independent groups?
She said something about waxing and waning of viral load, and the timing of the blood draw may be very important to get a PCR positive. They had multiple samples from the patients in the study, so could find the 'most positive' for each person.
I didn't catch anything like that question about PCR, but she said there were emailed questions she didn't have time to answer and they would be answered on ProHealth and maybe WPI, so maybe it will be answered there. Dr Bateman called the culture test the "gold standard" of tests and I think that is because the retrovirus can be at any stage of it's "life" in the other tests and maybe not show up or be detectable, but if it is reproduced in culture, it's there for sure.
That is only true if the antibody testing and PCR are reliable, because PCR must be used to establish the validity of antibody testing, and an antibody must be used to read the cultured sample.
I've had it 6 years, I hope that isn't too long, it might end up being 8-10 years by the time anything comes along to treat it, I feel awful now, I was so optimistic.
Why wouldn't they be able to treat it later on?
That part did not make sense to me. Older infections will certainly be harder to treat, because with retroviral infections after a certain point the virus is established in your own DNA. From that point on you have to treat the down-stream effects of the infection more aggressively. But you still can stop further replication of the retrovirus with ART, and in time, once your own cells have been replaced, the retrovirus should be mostly out of your DNA. But that could take several years, some cells are replaced more slowly, and some neural cells are never replaced, so I guess if the retrovirus is in the nerve DNA you may just have to treat neural symptoms for the rest of your life. Maybe that was what she meant.