1. Guest, for the 'News in Brief' week beginning 10th February 2020 - click here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

OMF/Ron Davis Research Update May 2018

Discussion in 'BioMedical ME/CFS News' started by Indigophoton, May 22, 2018.

  1. Indigophoton

    Indigophoton Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    9,734
    Location:
    UK
    The latest brief (7 or 8 mins) update from Ron Davis,



    Summary:

    Most of severely ill study data collected and analysed, now trying to get it online for people to access, and writing a paper. Hope people will use it to develop hypotheses that can be funded by NIH.

    Other work in the lab includes another big data analysis on a range of severities and a study in families.

    Working on T cell activation with Mark Davis' group and Lars Steinmetz.

    Sequencing on KIR locus - seems to be involved in interaction with viruses, severely ill data shows it is important.

    Metabolomics, sequencing and pathway analysis combined allows examination of possible metabolic traps.

    Things going slower than preferred, so are hiring more people. One person per project at present.

    Have a paper on one of the biomarkers going out soon, and a second paper on the nanoneedle in progress. Biomarker will show illness is not being faked.

    They are looking everywhere they can, want to hire expertise they don't currently have, and RD wants a cure, not just a treatment.

    Edit: spelling
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2018
    TiredSam, Rosie, petrichor and 43 others like this.
  2. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,377
    Likes Received:
    23,194
    Forbin, emma, Inara and 9 others like this.
  3. Indigophoton

    Indigophoton Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    9,734
    Location:
    UK
  4. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,377
    Likes Received:
    23,194
    The best part is that they're going to publish their findings and make the severely ill study data available. This should stimulate interest.
     
    petrichor, Forbin, emma and 30 others like this.
  5. hixxy

    hixxy Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    681
    Thanks for the summary. I'm really not a fan of video blogs for disseminating information.
     
  6. Londinium

    Londinium Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    237
    Likes Received:
    2,311
    Agreed. Am pleased they are going to do formal publication as I think it’d been unclear in the past as to whether they’d focus solely on data sharing.
     
    Forbin, Invisible Woman, emma and 6 others like this.
  7. Webdog

    Webdog Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,783
    Likes Received:
    11,453
    "So far, in the nanoneedle, every patient shows a clear signal, and none of the healthy controls do." (at 5:50 mark).
     
    ahimsa, RoughDayz, Forbin and 9 others like this.
  8. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,311
    Likes Received:
    16,072
    I'm a bit concerned about releasing the nanoneedle if it shows other conditions as well, in recent years instead of proving a process or product its more common to release a beta and improve over time. This has advantages and disadvantages, it gets things out faster but refinement is a never finished task it seems. That being true if it works and other conditions are found that can be identified by further tests then its viable but i do think if its widely used more conditions that cause a block will be found hurting the reputation of the test. That said i don't want to wait years or decades for it to be proven...
     
  9. adambeyoncelowe

    adambeyoncelowe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,917
    Likes Received:
    13,328
    But as Ron says, it still shows something is up. That might be enough for now while he explores the other three biomarkers.
     
    Chezboo, Binkie4, Webdog and 4 others like this.
  10. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,311
    Likes Received:
    16,072
    Thats the thing, enough for now, thats not a good biomarker.
     
  11. adambeyoncelowe

    adambeyoncelowe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,917
    Likes Received:
    13,328
    No, I agree. However, if it shows high frequency in, say, any illness with metabolic issues, but those other illnesses have adequate tests already, it's still better than what we have now. For instance, you could use the nanoneedle to prove something is wrong, and then an MRI to decide whether the patient has MS or ME.
     
  12. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    19,837
    Likes Received:
    102,163
    Location:
    UK
    Maybe biomarker is the wrong word in the case of the nanoneedle if the test is not exclusive to ME, but I still think it could be incredibly useful to patients for 3 reasons.
    - It's a sign that there is something biologically wrong, so doctors have to stop the psychosomatic nonsense and take us seriously.
    - It enables researchers to decide which patients to include in studies and clinical trials.
    - And it's an indicator of whether a treatment has cured a patient if used after treatment.
     
    Cheesus, TiredSam, RoughDayz and 13 others like this.
  13. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,311
    Likes Received:
    16,072
    I agree, it would just be nice to have a singular marker we can go after the PACErs with. And who knows this might even be it.
     
  14. andypants

    andypants Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,217
    Likes Received:
    10,699
    Location:
    Norway
    Dr. Davis has previously stated that they intend to test with blood from other, comparable, diseases as well, like MS, Lyme, diabetes, etc., so I assume they are aware of the possibility.
     
  15. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,311
    Likes Received:
    16,072
    But can they test every major disease and the common minor ones?
    The answer is probably no.

    I don't mean my recalcitrance to suggest not releasing this test, just that its not a silver biomarker bullet, at least not yet.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2018
    Chezboo, Inara, merylg and 2 others like this.
  16. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,377
    Likes Received:
    23,194
    It sounds like the nanoneedle biosensor is very sensitive as it can detect this abnormality even in mildly ill patients. Which probably means that there's going to be other illnesses with the same problem. It will still be revolutionary.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2018
  17. andypants

    andypants Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,217
    Likes Received:
    10,699
    Location:
    Norway
    Healthy scepticism is what this forum is all about, isn't it?:) Anyway, I agree. Still a step in the right direction, but probably more hurdles left to cross than we can imagine.
     
    Forbin, Invisible Woman, emma and 6 others like this.
  18. TrixieStix

    TrixieStix Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    1,209
    I'd be interested in undergoing the test if available in future. To see what result is like in someone such as myself who met the criteria for ME and whose ME diagnosis has turned out to have been a misdiagnosis. I still have the ME-like & PEM-like symptoms, very low Natural Killer Cell function, multiple false positive Lyme tests all caused by autoimmune disease.
     
  19. Cinders66

    Cinders66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    6,591
    It's funny I never think of a cure, I'd be insanely grateful for just 10% lessening of severity
     
  20. Sid

    Sid Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    1,754
    I suspect that the nanoneedle won't be specific to ME/CFS but if this test is validated and shows a clear-cut difference between sick and healthy people that would be amazing. Our first priority is to get authorities to have to admit there's a real problem and to stop sectioning people.
     

Share This Page