G
I,m talking about the study carried out by D'Arcy et al European Urology Suppliment 2008 7(3):271.This study reportedly failed to find XMRV in prostatic cancer tissue.they used NIH3T3 cells as positive controls.These cells are propagated from a mouse embyonic fibroblast cell line and are easily infected by several viruses.In December 2009 however a study undertaken by M.J Metzer et al was published in The American Microbiologist's Journal of Virology.The authors demonstrated that XMRV had little or no direct transforming ability and ONLY POORLY INFECTED NIH3T3 cells.This information means that these cells ,are highly suspect and highly inappropiate control-please note that I am in no way impuning the integrity of the authors- but this information seriously undermines their conclusion re the absence of XMRV.These authors also state that they DID find XMRV in the Du145 cell lines.These are prostatic cancer cells! The analysts and commentators seem to have focused on the headline conclusions(AS USUAL) .I have copies of both studies if anyone is interested-but you will have to instruct me how to get them to you as my computer skills,including my typing,are not great! MY children are in fits of laughter as I try to navigate this forum.