• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

VIP Dx XMRV Test discontinued

ukxmrv

Senior Member
Messages
4,413
Location
London
I don't think that the name matters Firestormm.

Originally it was just XMRV but after the Alter Lo paper it was extended to other related RV's (MLV's and HGRV's)

A patient with HIV was just as sick when they were told that they had LAV or HTLV and all the other names.

Over time the WPI will sequence them all and then names will be agreed for all the viruses they have found. I'm happy to wait until then.
 

Firestormm

Senior Member
Messages
5,055
Location
Cornwall England
the test results i think said XMRV serology but it was understood that it could be other related strains too....?

Thanks for replying.

I don't think that the name matters Firestormm.

Originally it was just XMRV but after the Alter Lo paper it was extended to other related RV's (MLV's and HGRV's)

A patient with HIV was just as sick when they were told that they had LAV or HTLV and all the other names.

Over time the WPI will sequence them all and then names will be agreed for all the viruses they have found. I'm happy to wait until then.

Yeah I guess it will take another published paper to support the claims being made now. I mean Lombardi was 'XMRV' wasn't it? So presumably the title at least is now up for debate.

I really hope that Dr Mikovits et al. can produce another research paper, peer reviewed and published that confirms whether or not a retrovirus (whatever it is called) is present in patient blood (and/or tissue).

The BWG concluded that they couldn't find XMRV/MLVs in the samples - so if the claims stand up to scrutiny that another (or similar strain) of retrovirus accounts for the 'tests' being 'positive' then surely it will not take much to provide evidence?

Anyway, thanks for replying.