# Research casts doubt over US chronic fatigue virus claim



## M&M (Jan 20, 2002)

Interesting article, at the very least...http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/201...rome-xmrv-virusBrief excerpt:


> King's College hospital runs a specialised CFS/ME clinic. The researchers selected blood samples from 186 patients who were, they said, typical of those who attend. They had suffered for years, were very disabled by the disease and more than 90% said their illness definitely or probably started after a viral infection.They sent the samples to a team at Imperial's retrovirology labs. Professor Myra McClure, from the division of medicine at Imperial College London and one of the authors of the study published today by PloS One (Public Library of Science), said: "Our research was carried out under rigorous conditions. We used very sensitive testing methods to look for the virus. If it had been there, we would have found it."The lab in which we carried out the analysis had never housed any of the murine leukaemia viruses related to XMRV, and we took great care to ensure there was no contamination. We are confident our results show there is no link between XMRV and CFS, at least in the UK." The authors say there is no evidence to justify testing people with CFS for the virus or putting them on drug treatment.


----------



## SheLea (Feb 21, 2010)

Very interesting article... There has been so much talk over the past few months about the XMRV virus and CFS... I held out some hope for this one... I am sure there will be a lot of research coming from this... It will be interesting to see what comes of it...


----------



## M&M (Jan 20, 2002)

There have actually already been an additional 2 or 3 studies trying to replicate the WPI's results of XMRV in CFS patients. All have come up empty handed, just as the study posted above. What I think is kind of funny is that many have apparently forgotten that over the last 20 or 30 years, very similar things have happened over and over. Many times a study has found something in CFS patients, and it is then proclaimed to be the first evidence of true disease, and an important cause of illness. (Take for example HHV6 and 7, EBV, RNaseL, etc.) All of those were found, and then touted to be the cause of CFS. Sadly, many patients ended up wasting a lot of money being tested and then treated for these issues, only to eventually find out that they weren't causing the illness they had at all, and in fact only played a very minor roll. So, while I definitely would encourage anyone who has a chronic illness to remain hopeful, I think it is absolutely just as important to remain realistic. That's why it has been difficult for many to get really excited about the XMRV research - we've heard the same claims before. I think a wait and see approach is wise here.But, yes, a lot more research has been done already on this issue since the WPI's report initially came out (and I'm sure more will continue to be done), but all additional research so far has been contradictory to the initial reports of XMRV playing a pivotal roll in CFS patients.


----------

