good news clip of judy m explaining how we get sick from xmrv

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,798
Likes
37,539
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
Hi

It is interesting to note the change in presentation. It leaves less doubt about causation. XRMV is described as a pathogen, which is triggered when T and B cells become activated by infection or vaccination.

Bye
Alex
 

Cort

Phoenix Rising Founder
Messages
7,355
Likes
2,017
Location
Arizona in winter & W. North America otherwise
When was that made?

The problem is that the way this news report goes Dr. Mikovits is made to sound like mother to child transmission has already been proven....it may very well be true but that finding is way ahead of the science here - no one has found XMRV in breast milk, no one has shown that mothers can transmit it to the child 0 (its not chewed up in the stomach acids?). There haven't been any papers on this and here this reporter is making her sound like its a fait accompli.

I don't if that helps her or the WPI. I don't know how much it hurts either...researchers are used to getting things twisted to fit a story.
 

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,798
Likes
37,539
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
Hi Cort

If you listen carefully you hear Judy say it probably is transmitted through breast feeding. She is more than a little careful. She also stops short of saying that XMRV causes CFS or autism, but it is strongly implied. I find the shift in emphasis from "new retrovirus" to "pathogen" very interesting however. What does she know that is not public yet?

I have not seen any date on this clip. Did anyone else see one?

Bye
Alex
 
Messages
76
Likes
1
alex3619 said:
I have not seen any date on this clip. Did anyone else see one?

Bye
Alex
This clip is very old - was put on Youtube on 30th march but i think it was possibly even made last year around the time that the science article was published
 

CBS

Senior Member
Messages
1,513
Likes
849
When was that made?

The problem is that the way this news report goes Dr. Mikovits is made to sound like mother to child transmission has already been proven....it may very well be true but that finding is way ahead of the science here - no one has found XMRV in breast milk, no one has shown that mothers can transmit it to the child 0 (its not chewed up in the stomach acids?). There haven't been any papers on this and here this reporter is making her sound like its a fait accompli.

I don't if that helps her or the WPI. I don't know how much it hurts either...researchers are used to getting things twisted to fit a story.
The anchor is Gulstan Dart (anyone actually think that's his real name?). He works for Sacramento, California's Channel 3 (http://www.kcra.com). There is only one link to a video on CFS listd on the Channel 3 site. That link is dated Oct. 9, 2009. However, the story that is shown when clicking on this link is about a casino opening. Can't find any other videos on the site about CFS but the thumbnail on the Channel 3 site is the picture of XMRV with which the YouTube video ends.
 

Sing

Senior Member
Messages
1,723
Likes
1,590
Location
New England
When was that made?

The problem is that the way this news report goes Dr. Mikovits is made to sound like mother to child transmission has already been proven....it may very well be true but that finding is way ahead of the science here - no one has found XMRV in breast milk, no one has shown that mothers can transmit it to the child 0 (its not chewed up in the stomach acids?). There haven't been any papers on this and here this reporter is making her sound like its a fait accompli.

I don't if that helps her or the WPI. I don't know how much it hurts either...researchers are used to getting things twisted to fit a story.
Frankly speaking, I agree that it is most important for people with ME/CFS to have a very clear idea of what the science has established, what it hasn't and what is somewhere in between.

However, As for the general public, I think it is necessary to play politics to a degree, to emphasize the most serious facts AND possibilities. This is like blowing air on a fire you are struggling to light after years of no wood or wet wood.

Some issues in the world are already raging fires, attracting masses of attention and resources. Example: terrorism. Other issues deserve serious attention and resources but don't get it--like ME/CFS. In this case it is politically smart and probably even politically necessary to emphasize not only every fact at your disposal but also to make a compelling story for people to respond to, which connects the dots.

Dr. Mikovits, in my opinion, does both very well, as both a skilled scientific researcher and as a political spokesperson. We need both aspects very much if we are ever to get out of the sidelines and our long standing helplessness.
 

Cort

Phoenix Rising Founder
Messages
7,355
Likes
2,017
Location
Arizona in winter & W. North America otherwise
Frankly speaking, I agree that it is most important for people with ME/CFS to have a very clear idea of what the science has established, what it hasn't and what is somewhere in between.

However, As for the general public, I think it is necessary to play politics to a degree, to emphasize the most serious facts AND possibilities. This is like blowing air on a fire you are struggling to light after years of no wood or wet wood.

Some issues in the world are already raging fires, attracting masses of attention and resources. Example: terrorism. Other issues deserve serious attention and resources but don't get it--like ME/CFS. In this case it is politically smart and probably even politically necessary to emphasize not only every fact at your disposal but also to make a compelling story for people to respond to, which connects the dots.

Dr. Mikovits, in my opinion, does both very well, as both a skilled scientific researcher and as a political spokesperson. We need both aspects very much if we are ever to get out of the sidelines and our long standing helplessness.
I agree that we desperately need more effective public spokesman - I just don't know if the research world allows its researchers to be those people. Let's put it this way - while some people in the research world are political advocates I think that advocacy may come at a cost at the research end. I think its fine if they stick to the published works - but I worry about speculating in public. I imagine that, over time, that's something that researchers learn never to do given the way the media works.
 

Sing

Senior Member
Messages
1,723
Likes
1,590
Location
New England
I agree that we desperately need more effective public spokesman - I just don't know if the research world allows its researchers to be those people. Let's put it this way - while some people in the research world are political advocates I think that advocacy may come at a cost at the research end. Hopefully not.

I agree that if the public can rally the support you need then by all means do it but the public is probably never going to provide the support the WPI needs to do its work;that will come from grants and treatment trials - so I think they really need the support of the research community.
Yeah, it might be better having different people in the roles of scientist on the one hand and advocate or political spokesperson on the other.

When I talked about rallying the public, I was thinking of this as a source of political pressure. The research community bows to political pressures frequently in what it studies, or let's slide or won't study at all.
 

Cort

Phoenix Rising Founder
Messages
7,355
Likes
2,017
Location
Arizona in winter & W. North America otherwise
Yeah, it might be better having different people in the roles of scientist on the one hand and advocate or political spokesperson on the other.

When I talked about rallying the public, I was thinking of this as a source of political pressure. The research community bows to political pressures frequently in what it studies, or let's slide or won't study at all.
In our position - with a disease that the research community usually ignores I agree that political pressure is crucial! In fact until XMRV showed up I thought it was the only way that we would ever be able to get good funding.

We just had an XMRV -CFS study funded by the NIH - its an excellent study - I believe studying Dr. Bell's pediatric cohort; hopefully its a harbinger of things to come. Unfortunately WPI has still not received a single grant for XMRV! (and from what I've been told they have tried). Hopefully that will change soon.
 

Megan

Senior Member
Messages
233
Likes
13
Location
Australia
This clip is very old - was put on Youtube on 30th march but i think it was possibly even made last year around the time that the science article was published
I'm sure I have seen this clip too, I think at the time of the announcement last year. I think Judy is being more careful now in saying some of those things so I doubt it is recent.
 

Otis

Señor Mumbler
Messages
1,117
Likes
117
Location
USA
The anchor is Gulstan Dart (anyone actually think that's his real name?).
Nope. :) Or if so I wonder why he didn't change it.

He works for Sacramento, California's Channel 3 (http://www.kcra.com). There is only one link to a video on CFS listd on the Channel 3 site. That link is dated Oct. 9, 2009. However, the story that is shown when clicking on this link is about a casino opening. Can't find any other videos on the site about CFS but the thumbnail on the Channel 3 site is the picture of XMRV with which the YouTube video ends.
As I recall Judy talked quite a lot about possible methods of transmission very early on after publication, including nursing mothers.

It might make sense that this was footage gathered right after the Science paper, and that this story, for whatever reason, was put together now. Perhaps to throw something on XMRV out there ahead of the FDA/NIH study results. Either that or someone in the news room bet "Mr. Dart" that he couldn't find an excuse to show - not one but TWO nursing mothers - on the evening news. Perhaps not. :rolleyes:
 

Otis

Señor Mumbler
Messages
1,117
Likes
117
Location
USA
Robyn,

I absolutly agree with the benefits to baby, it doesn't bother me in the least and I didn't mean to offend anyone. I'm sorry if I came as negative to the idea or practice of nursing, definitly not my intent.

Otis
 
Messages
36
Likes
0
I think the only way that the public is really going to get interested in this topic (and thereby generate political pressure for more research money) is through threats to public health and that means discussion of transmission. Breast-feeding, blood transfusions, sexual transmission and everything else are therefore necessary discussion items to be pushed into the public arena.