HGRVs - Constructive general discussion - for exploring HGRV research

[Bob]

Any Information if and how the B Cells behaviour gets changed cause of the Infection by HGRVs?

A good question - If there are answers to that, it might be in the Ruscettis' work, or in Judy's immunological paper. I can't remember all the details, so that's why I thought it would be helpful to go over the details on this thread.

Where does the "EDTA / heparin" statment from Judy come from? And why does the BWG FAQ say that every lab could choose to do the test they want but Judy seems to say the opposite?

It's on Judy's presentation on the Invest in ME DVD.

Also it seems lot of papers refer to vp62 as XMRV. The BWG FAQ states that there is no HGRV. No published virus cloned sequenzed or isolated from humans. So what are all the gene sequenzes in the genbank? Ar they all vp62 even with the variances?

They are all partial sequences - There aren't any other full sequences.
Having said that, I thought that VP35 and VP42 were full sequences, in which case the statement in the BWG FAQs is factually incorrect.
I posted some details about VP35 and VP42 the other day, but I can't remember what I posted - if I find my post, i'll repost it here.
The WPI are currently carrying out a new full sequence of one (or more?) of their isolates, which is supposed to be completed in a matter of days now.

 

[Bob]

Although I agree with you Bob, that there is not much new information available, I think what we need to do is to try to analyse the available evidence more carefuly without being distracted by attacks on Dr Mikovits science.

Yes, I agree currer... That's exactly why I started this thread... So we could discuss all the existing details in a constructive environment.

It would be nice to dig out and review some of the existing evidence, including the lesser-known research (i.e. by the Ruscettis etc), and the prostate cancer papers.

 

[Bob]

Please, by all means, investigate Gamma Retro Viruses just don't call them HUMAN Gamma Retro Viruses. There just isn't any evidence to support that XMRV/MLV/variants are involved in any human disease be it ME/CFS or cancer.

********** If you want to only attract the believers and avoid the critics, fine, go ahead. You might feel better that you do something about our disease, but you are not helping the cause.

**********

Tony, we do not need your permission to discuss whatever we wish to discuss, thank you.
You have not contributed to the discussion, but only criticised the members using this thread.
There is published evidence of possible human infection by HGRVs (e.g. VP35, VP42, Dr Singh's work etc.), and this is a thread to discuss that evidence.
But also, it is a thread to discuss the possibilities, theories and hypotheses surrounding potential HGRVs, so they do not need to exist to discuss them.
And I think I made it clear in the opening post that this is a discussion thread for people who are interested in exploring the subject and the research.
If you are not interested in exploring the research and the possibilities, then that's fine, and I request that you don't contribute again.

 

[Bob]

It looks like this thread has already attracted posters who do not wish to use the thread as it was clearly intended to be used.
May I suggest to those of us who do wish to explore the subject positively and constructively, that we just completely ignore the other posts.
(I'm afraid that I've ignored my own suggestion, above, but I'll resist responding to other posts.)

 

[currer]

I agree that we should ignore off topic posts or attacks completely so that we can focus on the discussion. This should make the thread much more interesting and I hope move the discussion further on into interesting areas than we have been able to hitherto.

 

[kurt]

MOD - I understand the intention of this thread, but this is an open discussion forum. To silence opposing viewpoints really does not fit within the framework of public discussion. This forum does have the ability to host private discussions, if you would like that, please start a group (on the main page go to the menu item forum/community/groups). If you need help, PM a sys admin and that can be facilitated. There are numerous ongoing private group discussions on the forum.

Meanwhile, I just want to point out something that I have not seen discussed yet here, the B cell finding may implicate gamma herpes viruses (EBV and CMV are gammas). Don't know why that has not come up, they are not HGRVs, but they are highly virulent HGVs.

 

[Bob]

Well that's the end of this project then.

There are a couple of posts in this thread that demonstrate exactly why the forum has become a very hostile place for people who wish to explore this subject and all the related research.

It's a shame that a safe place can't be provided for members who are interested in exploring this subject constructively, without having to set up a private group.

I didn't think it was unreasonable for members to have a thread in which they could explore a subject that interests them without being constantly told that their opinions are invalid, that the research is invalid, that the researchers are corrupt etc. etc. etc. Even if those opinions are totally valid, members still need a safe place to constructively discuss subjects that are important to them without being constantly disrupted.

Just for clarity - I certainly don't object to constructive opposing opinions - But it's the constant harassment that has been going on recently that has made the forum impossible to use constructively.

If any members are interested in being involved in a private group specifically to discuss this subject, then please could you let me know, either on this thread, or by sending me a PM. If a number of people express an interest, then it might be worth doing.

 

[RustyJ]

I agree that we should ignore off topic posts or attacks completely so that we can focus on the discussion. This should make the thread much more interesting and I hope move the discussion further on into interesting areas than we have been able to hitherto.

I agree. I think the ignore move might be the way to go.

Yes, it was a very small sample. But Judy has detected plenty of antibodies before, and published a paper on her findings, so I'm not sure why you are so convinced that we don't have antibodies Rusty?

Hi Bob, I seem to recollect Judy referring to why antibodies may not always be there but I do not have the reference. And this did happen in the macaque study.

 

[redo]

I think it was a good initiative Bob. I really can't see why off topic posts couldn't be moved to threads which are on topic (such as the eco postings and my reply).

Speaking of the new findings, I think we ought to ask ourselves if HGRV is causing the autoimmunity, is it as a defence mechanism (such as a way of making the immune system unable to deal with itself), is it the bodys useful response to an infection, or is it neather, simply a way the HGRV cause symptoms, but have nothing to do with HGRV persistance. If it's the first, than it could fit with a time lag for symptom improvement, as it takes time for the body to clear the virus after getting some immune unbalance sorted. However, I think it's the last.

 

[Bob]

I agree. I think the ignore move might be the way to go.

OK, let's try that for a while then, and see how it goes.

 

[ukxmrv]

I'm happy to proceed like that Bob, Rusty and all. Let's see how we go and ignore all the off topic posts.

 

[Dreambirdie]

Hey Bob--I'm glad you are doing this and will be lurking in to see what you all come with.

AND btw... there is an IGNORE LIST that you can create, by going to a specific member's profile and designating them to it. Then that person's post will not be seen. It really does come in handy to avoid those endless circular arguments. Ignoring someone does apparently fit into the forum rules, otherwise the ignore list would not exist.

 

[redo]

I think it was a good initiative Bob. I really can't see why off topic posts couldn't be moved to threads which are on topic (such as the eco postings and my reply).

Speaking of the new findings, I think we ought to ask ourselves if HGRV is causing the autoimmunity, is it as a defence mechanism (such as a way of making the immune system unable to deal with itself), is it the bodys useful response to an infection, or is it neather, simply a way the HGRV cause symptoms, but have nothing to do with HGRV persistance. If it's the first, than it could fit with a time lag for symptom improvement, as it takes time for the body to clear the virus after getting some immune unbalance sorted. However, I think it's the last.

Some more thoughts I got about this. I remember a very serious proposition is still open to find a immune modulator which works on reversing much of the immune disruptance stuff HIV does, so that + HAART could be an elimination strategy. That again is an indication that a potential immune dysruption by another retrovirus is a "survival stragegy" for the retrovirus. Stop the immune dysruptance and you'd stop much of the virus since the body will be more fit to handle it.

On top of that, immune modulation can stop symptoms direct.

 

[GaryK]

Bob count me in for a group, Thanks for this Idea.. I was enjoying this until a few aggressive posters showed up. Ignoring works for me as well.

Also Redo I'm interesting in your thinking on HGVR as a possible on auto immune disorders.
Suppose these being true MS could really be an indicator as to where to look for that mechanism. I've Read that Auto Antibodies are found in the Spinal fluids/Brain.

 

[Dreambirdie]

Stop the immune dysruptance and you'd stop much of the virus since the body will be more fit to handle it.

On top of that, immune modulation can stop symptoms direct.

Cordyceps, Ganoderma, and Reishi are known to be immune modulators. I am not sure but I think Equilibrant--which Dr Chia recommends, has some medicinal mushrooms in its ingredient list.

 

[currer]

Link to the Singh website with all the XMRV research still up,
http://www.path.utah.edu/labs/singh/xmrv.php

Link to Dr Singhs OFFER 2010 conference talk
http://www.screencast.com/users/OFF...os/media/9486fbbc-2f0c-400d-a9a7-1086907594cf

Hard to see how the histopathology slides could be contamination.

 

[RustyJ]

Thanks for links currer

 

[RustyJ]

As far as I am concerned there is not problem with the positives in the BWG. This looks at the issue of false negatives in PCR assays. I did post it in a new thread, but decided to also put it here for constructive discussion.

False negative results from using common PCR reagents
Given the data presented in this manuscript, we would propose that in cases such as the debate regarding the existence of novel infectious viruses, failure to find a virus is not the equivalent of evidence against its existence. The potential for false negative results needs to be considered and carefully controlled in PCR experiments, just as the potential for false positive results already is.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1756-0500-4-457.pdf

 

[Deatheye]

SO I'd really like to know in regards to that papers do we have the data to see if there are false negatives in the BWG? Or bether sad: The data to see if what is causing a potential false negativ was used there? specially the samples that where defined as negativ and then blidned and sent to the laboraties.

I really wished I'm more into medicine and this stuff... As long as my brain more or less works the way it should I'm good with logical, abstract, analytical thinking and above average IQ. But doesn't help much if the text you try to understand is just gibberish xD

 

[currer]

It does look as if it would be possible to get false negatives, and it underlines the need to use other methods to search for a retrovirus and not rely entirely on one method when confronting the challenge of an unknown agent.
That paper is a very timely find, thanks rusty.

This paper only emphasises what I have always feared - the danger that the research on MLVs and ME would be prematurely closed down after a superficial investigation. In the past researchers used to spend years researching a new area before they felt they understood it adequately and had controlled for all variables.

Dr Mikovits always emphasised the need to use multiple mutually supportive methods of detection to look for "footprints of infection"

Looking again at the Singh papers yesterday, I cannot see how the prostate cancer studies can be retracted. The histopathology slides show clear staining of cells from the rabbit antibody used. This is research on tissues, and not only on blood, as in ME research.

At the risk of going off-topic, to respond to kurts post about EBV, Dr Snyderman discusses this in a comment on Jamies blog. Only 25% of CLL patients have associated EBV, Dr Snyderman himself is negative for it. In the 1970s papers on lymphoma, almost all patients had detectable MLRV in their tumor cells but not normal cells.
http://treatingxmrv.blogspot.com/2011/09/when-going-gets-tough.html

This is why we are interested in pursuing another line of enquiry and are discussing MLRVs on this thread, becausee there is a clear link between THESE pathogens and disease.