Dr. Teitlebaum and WPI

[Cort]

It just shows how complicated it all is doesn't it? RNase L was (is?) a big thing.

Several studies suggested that RNase L fragmentation was commonly found in ME/CFS and, importantly, they were able to correlate symptom severity with the degree of fragmentation: it seemed to be a key part of this disease. (Some later studies have not been so successful, however.)

But here we find - at least according to this group - that RNase L is not correlated with XMRV diagnosis. How could this be?; how is it that a common finding in Dr. Peterson's set of patients (RNase L) - does not correlate with another common finding in his set of patients (XMRV)? There are apparently a significant # of patients with RNase L problems without XMRV and vice versa.

Then there are cytokines? the Science paper said as I remember that the patients in the study had high IL-8 levels. Dr. Klimas just did a study showing ME/CFS patients had LOW Il-8 levels. It's just very complex!

I'm ready for anything....

 

[Eric Johnson from I&I]

WPI has just recently acknowledged, using an editorial the NCF put out moons ago, that DeFritas' CAV does not equal XMRV. For a month and a half, the conjecture's been allowed to mushroom in cyberspace. We've read third-party reports that Dr. Mikovits intended to prove the exact opposite; we've read second-hand statements that NCF thinks XMRV is both important and irrelevant

How is this the news that's "not really the 'bad' news." This is no news, unless there are credible sources for Mikovits intending to prove that, which I think is unlikely unless she has reasons she hasnt divulged. At face value, the DeFreitas virus is in a whole different class of retroviruses, which is plain as day, but it is conceivable that someone could figure out what errors DeFreitas made, if any. And thus re-interpret in a different way those of her assays which that someone believes are valid.

I've seen a million patients talking about how XMRV must be the DeFreitas virus. They were wrong. Some reporter misunderstood something and said 20% of the subjects had cancer, which was believed by another researcher and mention in his comments on the Mikovits paper. Reporters get stuff wrong a lot.

 

[lisaxxx]

Teitelbaum

Quote "Teitelbaum himself seems to report everything in a way that is designed to glorify himself and sell supplements"

Do tell

He has claimed a Success Rate of something like 90% for CURING people with CFS
Yet after like 10 years of this claim I have never found even one person CURED by him
He also runs a series of Fibro-Fatigue centers which also promise quite a lot - but again I cannot locate anyone actually CURED at one of these centers
Not saying they don't exist.....
But if they do they are very very hard to find