pollycbr125
Senior Member
- Messages
- 353
- Location
- yorkshire
Wall Street Jounal, Amy Dockser Marcus: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443720204578002180958369660.html
In a paper published Tuesday in the journal mBio, scientists said they found no evidence of infection in the blood of 293 people, including those with the condition and healthy controls
Virus Disproved as Cause of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
An estimated one million people in the United States have the condition; many are severely disabled and homebound.
Dr. Lipkin said that he viewed chronic fatigue syndrome as a major illness and intended to use blood samples he had obtained to investigate the causes.
So after reading the article I saw your comment. Cause of that I've read the article again and I still don't understand your irritation.The medical xpress article comments they did find some with positive antibodies though. I wonder if this is in reference to the 2009 article or the current one, I wish they were more clear. Its position does imply its the current study.
None of the laboratories found evidence of XMRV or pMLV in samples from the recruited CFS/ME or control subjects. For quality assurance of the molecular tests, separate positive controls (blood samples intentionally spiked with XMRV/pMLV) and negative controls (blood samples prescreened and lacking the retroviruses) were used and confirmed that the diagnostic assays were functioning properly. Nine control and nine CFS/ME blood samples were positive for XMRV/pMLV-reactive antibodies. The accuracy of this assay cannot be determined because there are no positive controls in the general population with XMRV serology. Nonetheless, there was no correlation of antibody reactivity in blood from CFS/ME and controls.
Hi, everyone, I'm not sure why the feeling here is that this is bad news. Don't we need reliable information about our disease more than anything else? So, if this is reliable information, can that be a bad thing? It might be more helpful to think of it as clearing up one more unknown. Now, let's move on to the next one...
Cheers,
Lynne
Hi, everyone, I'm not sure why the feeling here is that this is bad news. Don't we need reliable information about our disease more than anything else? So, if this is reliable information, can that be a bad thing? It might be more helpful to think of it as clearing up one more unknown. Now, let's move on to the next one...
"The bottom line is we found no evidence of infection with XMRV and pMLV. These results refute any correlation between these agents and disease," says Ian Lipkin of Columbia University, a co-author on the study.