Male CFS Patients May Have Option

Daisymay

Senior Member
Messages
751
Likes
4,055
Latest from Dr Luckett's blog, could be good news for the guys and who knows maybe there is or will be something similar for the gals with reducing progesterone levels which are also implicated in XMRV.

BW,

Daisymay

http://cfidsresearch.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Male CFS Patients May Have Option
In recent studies, it has been shown that DHT (dihydrotestosterone) increases XMRV replication rate threefold. This is not surprising, considering that a number of prostate drugs target this very hormone. Testosterone is metabolized to DHT, which is more powerful - but it is also implicated in pattern baldness, prostate problems, and excess body hair. Some drugs such as Casodex and Flutamide will block DHT at its receptor, however they will result in impaired fertility, loss of libido, and feminization effects, as testosterone is necessary to mitigate the effects of estrogen.

On the other hand, blocking the conversion of Testosterone to DHT should result in a significant drop in viral replication rate. There are 2 very safe drugs that I can think of that can attain this effect: Avodart (dutasteride), and Proscar (available as Propecia in a lower dosage form). A threefold drop in viral replication rate could have a significant effect on symptoms of ME/CFS - It is my opinion that at a certain threshold, the immune system is capable of keeping XMRV in check, hence why XMRV is found in a small number of healthy controls. I would like to see a clinical trial enrolling male patients to test this hypothesis. The effects of these drugs have negligible effects on male fertility - treatment will only produce mild reductions in sperm count averaging 6%. Serum testosterone increased considerably, which is necessary for muscle protein synthesis, regulating the hypothalamus-pituitary axis, and increasing mental and physical energy - all things ME/CFS, Fibromyalgia, and Gulf War Syndrome patients could stand to benefit from.
 

oerganix

Senior Member
Messages
611
Likes
9
replication rate

Since Dr Coffin has said XMRV replicates very slowly, I wonder how useful this would be, to anyone.
 
Messages
1,270
Likes
116
I'm sorry but, as nice as Dr. Luckett is, I find his blog full of wild speculations. He speculates on drugs, herbs, and even adds Gulf War Syndrome into XAND (a lot of GWS received toxic vaccines including anthrax with adjuvant that causes autoimmune illness; and some GWS were able to get well on doxycycline for six to eighteen months, suggesting a mycoplasma or similar organism). I think he should wait for research to confirm WPI findings and then see if XMRV is causative and in how many cases. He's got it pinned as *the* cause, yet even on this board, some have tested negative, some positive and one inconclusive.
 
Messages
1,270
Likes
116
Hi Daisy, they're not stated as ideas but as facts. I generally don't read his blog, it's that people keep reproducing parts here. I wish to respond on occasion and so I will.
 

boomer

Senior Member
Messages
143
Likes
3
Jenbooks

A blog is just that. He is not writing for a science paper or to meet anyone's standards. A blog can be whatever he thinks at the time. I appreciate his blogs so much that I find myself checking for updates regularly.
 
Messages
1,270
Likes
116
Not many here are treating it as a blog with opinions. Because he's a scientist and he is emphatic in his "statements" people here are giving him what I believe is too much credence. 'Nuff said. That's just my view.
 

Esther12

Senior Member
Messages
13,774
Likes
28,348
I find this blog a bit over-blown too. Too many exciting headlines!! He seems to not reply to comments either (that I've seen so far).
 

dannybex

Senior Member
Messages
3,332
Likes
2,331
Location
Seattle
I agree...

I'm sorry but, as nice as Dr. Luckett is, I find his blog full of wild speculations. He speculates on drugs, herbs, and even adds Gulf War Syndrome into XAND (a lot of GWS received toxic vaccines including anthrax with adjuvant that causes autoimmune illness; and some GWS were able to get well on doxycycline for six to eighteen months, suggesting a mycoplasma or similar organism). I think he should wait for research to confirm WPI findings and then see if XMRV is causative and in how many cases. He's got it pinned as *the* cause, yet even on this board, some have tested negative, some positive and one inconclusive.
With great respect to WildDaisy (and Dr. Luckett), I agree with Jill. It's important to keep in mind that Luckett's 'area of interest' is retroviral research, so his blog is likely to be somewhat biased, however unintentionally so.
 

oerganix

Senior Member
Messages
611
Likes
9
No response to questions

I find this blog a bit over-blown too. Too many exciting headlines!! He seems to not reply to comments either (that I've seen so far).
I have to agree with Jenbooks. Too much stated as fact when even the original researchers aren't saying that. And he doesn't answer questions, like where he got his information about the "stunning" revelation that Dr. Reeves has been "demoted", which is now being quoted all over the internet.

Yeah, it's "just" a blog, but he's claiming superior knowledge based on his being a retrovirologist, though he's unemployed at the moment, so I think we ought to be able to hold him to same standard as we do any other retrovirologist. And of course, I'll keep reading his blog, in what is almost an information vacuum at the moment.
 

flybro

Senior Member
Messages
706
Likes
225
Location
pluto
Dr Lucket

I'm glad Dr.Luckets blog is debated here,

I am also glad to be reminded that it is all conjecture, and possibly a somewhat bias conjecture.

I value everyones opinion here and elsewhere. In the absence of definitive facts, conjeture is all we have.

And I am so glad of it, otherwise it would be like watching paint dry.

I'm desperate for anytalk on XMRV.

It would be great to get some facts from the source of the facts though.

Thanks to all.
 
Messages
84
Likes
1
it is a plus he is writing here or anywhere else on xmrv or anything else , not a minus , as long as noone is forcing anyone to read him ..

i wish what he wrote was being discussed here , not the whole guy detailed into his employment status .. i d like to see where he showed his opinions ideas as scientific facts for example .. or without this it is not politically correct to accuse him for doing that .. i hope he doesnt stop writing , i m sure the majority want him be here ..
 
A

Aftermath

Guest
Mycoplasma and GWS

I'm sorry but, as nice as Dr. Luckett is, I find his blog full of wild speculations. He speculates on drugs, herbs, and even adds Gulf War Syndrome into XAND (a lot of GWS received toxic vaccines including anthrax with adjuvant that causes autoimmune illness; and some GWS were able to get well on doxycycline for six to eighteen months, suggesting a mycoplasma or similar organism). . .
Jen, as much as mycoplasma tends to be implicated in GWS (and by some in CFS as well), a major study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine on the use of doxycycline to treat GWS did not show any correlation with improvement.

That being said, I agree that blog is somewhat speculative. Still, I don't think that he would expect anyone to take it as gospel--it is just a series of ideas that appear scientifically valid on their faces.
 
Messages
1,270
Likes
116
Hi Aftermath, thanks for the update.

"A series of ideas"--? His interpretation of the CDC asking their HIV ie retrovirus experts to work on XMRV as a stunning move/demotion of Reeves---it's stated as fact. Well I'm *glad* they're having retrovirus experts work on a possible new retrovirus infection. That isn't a demotion, a stunning move or anything but plausible and sensible. And his statement that the consensus has emerged from that meeting in Cleveland that XMRV is *the* cause. With no verification.

We have good scientists working on this around the world. I know it's tough watching paint dry as someone on here said. OTOH, I really don't value what he's doing as it is as I said wild speculation in some cases. It can't be appreciated by the scientific community that is actually working on this? I hope not.

I don't want to get too...er...stentorian here. Take what I say with some grains of salt or sugar or whatever.
 
Messages
320
Likes
7
Hi Aftermath, thanks for the update.

" OTOH, I really don't value what he's doing as it is as I said wild speculation in some cases. It can't be appreciated by the scientific community that is actually working on this? I hope not.

I don't want to get too...er...stentorian here. Take what I say with some grains of salt or sugar or whatever.
It's speculation but in contrast to your speculations it's somewhat based on science. I really can't understand why you people are making such a fuss about him. If you have found the cause of CFS please let me know otherwise I'm really not interested in what you folks have to say. Do you have a Msc in biochemistry? NO? Well that's what I thought. Maybe that's why I like his blog so much. Where else does a retrovirologist post his opinion about XMRV? Where else does a retrovirologist answer comments? Where else do we get latest scientific info about a virus that at least for some of us could be cause and solution?
If you don't agree with him, that's fine, don't read his blog then but stop wasting your energy and our time by writing comments on related topics.
 
Messages
1,270
Likes
116
So. People can post excerpts from Luckett's blog here and he can state his opinions but I can't? No deal. I will occasionally state my opinion.
 

Marylib

Senior Member
Messages
448
Likes
51
Location
New Zealand
Go for it

Forge ahead, Jenbrooks and Levi and everyone else! That is one of the wonderful things about this forum. Everyone gets to say what they want, as long as we do not become....well, you know....excessively incorrigible.:p

Good thing we do it in writing, that way we cannot shout over each other and thereby not hear a thing;)
 
Messages
577
Likes
10
So. People can post excerpts from Luckett's blog here and he can state his opinions but I can't? No deal. I will occasionally state my opinion.
While I agree that Dr. Luckett is being highly speculative, it was you who seemed to have a problem with Dr. Luckett giving his opinion, he needed to wait until the XMRV is replicated, causality is established, etc before he writes what he has been writing, you said. It is one thing to say that we should be skeptical and take what he says with a grain of salt, which I agree we should do, but it is different to say he shouldn't be writing. I greatly appreciate reading his thoughts and even the wild speculations, they are very interesting, I think.