XMRV Study - Dr. Singh's results do not match WPI

May 6, 2011

Thought some might be interested in this...

Marti

" Dr. Singh's study was one of the `biggies' left. A murine retrovirologist at

the University of Utah and the ARUP labs who had been studying (and finding)

XMRV in prostate tissues, Dr. Singh started her CFS study about a year ago. Not

only did it involve an expert in the field but Dr. Singh was working in tandem

with one of our top ME/CFS physicians, Dr. Bateman and the Lights; it was an

exciting study.

The study was designed to account for many of the confounding factors such as

patient characterization (CFS patients or not?), geographic locations (different

variants of XMRV), clinical samples used (both healthy control and patient

samples treated the same), blinding and other methods - which could have

contributed to the negative results in other studies. The study was impressive

on and an August 2010 article questioned whether it was, in fact, the best XMRV

study underway? (See " The Best XMRV Study? Dr. Singh Talks! " . "

..

" Strong Conclusions - Drawing on the negative tests of the formerly positive

patients the authors went so far as to say that they `feel that XMRV is not

associated with CFS' not just in Utah but anywhere, and therefore felt `forced

to conclude' that prescribing antiretroviral drugs is `insufficiently justified'

and `potentially dangerous'.

They also noted that there is a `wealth of data' suggesting infectious

involvement in ME/CFS and, that efforts in that area should continue. "

May 6, 2011

I am too sick to read the paper but my understanding is that she used

novel methodology and took only 1 blood draw.

In other words, not a replication.

--

The Kafka Pandemic:

s_9182.html

I support the Whittemore- Institute (WPI)

===

I want to see the original (pre-hold) Lo et al. 2010 NIH/FDA/Harvard MRV paper.

Recommended Posts