Aa
A
A
Close
Avatar universal
PMBC - Shown not to be viral reservoirs
http://natap.org/2008/HCV/030508_01.htm
Cancel
114 Answers
Page 6 of 6
Avatar universal
Your comment above:  
"Since we're all conjecturing a theory here with no hard scientific evidence as yet to support it, I'll conjecture my own ponderance on a theory. "


My reply:

I am not sure why you keep going back to the same idea, that we are all 'conjecturing', and this is all opinions, and assumptions.  You continue to ignore the list of scientific studies presented, and hard, clinical evidence already demonstrated by HCV researchers.  Why do you choose not to hear what is being said, and read what has been posted?  Its hard to reason with someone who ignores what they want to, and then labels everything as 'conjecture' that they do not wish to understand.  I really can't discuss anything on this level.  The 'proof' regarding 'persistent virus' has been posted, published, disseminated widely, and discussed thoroughly on the forum over the past few years.  Its your choice to ignore it, but please stop calling scientific data and results 'conjecture'.

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Hm.  Out of the few studies I have had time, to read .. I didn't think I'd read anything about HOW the HCV mutants got to where they got to and definitive proof on that.. only that they exist.  Did I miss something?  And I'm not being facetious when I ask that question.  

From the bit I've read, it seemed to me that the only scientifically proven conclusion so far... is that existence of strains of HCV RNA in some form exist in body compartments and fluids other than the brain.  Nothing scientifically proven about how it got there nor what the implications are .. just that it has been found.  

If I missed that part ... I'm open to being pointed to it.  I just haven't had time to delve into it more than what I have to date.  

So..
HAS it been scientifically PROVEN how these strains got to these other body compartments and fluids?
HAS it been scientifically proven what the implications of this are?
IS there concrete data to support the two questions I have just asked?

If not... we are still at the conjecture stage on those two questions.  

If yes...then I am open to correcting my viewpoint once I've read the data that makes enough sense to me to do that.

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of all your accusations.  

I'm not "choosing" to ignore what has been read.  
I'm not ignoring what I wish to and choosing to label it as conjecture.
I'm not making active choices about what I choose to understand and what I don't.

This is simply as far as I've gotten on what I have read already.  It would be reckless for me to call my own viewpoint anything BUT conjecture and unless I see that there is definitive data supporting the two questions I've asked above....it all remains conjecture to me on THOSE questions - A) how it gets there (does it mutate off? Is it independent from the HCV RNA in the blood?  etc etc) .. and B) what the implications are.  I accept that it exists.

Your ongoing accusations anger and insult me.  I would appreciate it if you would quit painting me as a close-minded fearful ignorant person who is not interested in the truth and would prefer to hide her head in the sand.  I would appreciate it .. but I'm not holding my breath that you will stop.

Trish
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Trish:  From the bit I've read, it seemed to me that the only scientifically proven conclusion so far... is that existence of strains of HCV RNA in some form exist in body compartments and fluids other than the brain.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If not obvious...I meant, "other than the BLOOD."
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I am not in any way trying to insult you or accuse you of anything, but am trying to point out why I hold a particular viewpoint, ..a viewpoint which was developed in response to reading the list of studies that Willing linked.  I have looked for something that would invalidate these studies, or contradict them, and have been disappointed to find little or nothing. So, in other words, I did not have a particular point of view first, and then look for research studies to support that point of view, but the opposite is true;  I have read all the research available over the past five years, and have formed some conclusions based on the weight of these findings.  Here is what YOU said, way up near the top of this thread:

your comments were:

"It's not enough for me that someone with a particular viewpoint posts a bunch of studies that support their viewpoint.  Yes, I would like to see other studies posted as well by those who don't share the viewpoint of Willing, DoubleDose, et al.  However.  I don't make up my mind by counting who posts the most studies. "

My reply is that I don't make up my mind by counting who posts the most studies, but I do pay attention to what the preponderance of the available research results conclude.  The studies LEAD ME to my point of view, and I remain open to seeing something that might prove them wrong.  I honestly believe that this is a pretty typical, and rational way to form an opinion, or to draw a conclusion.

I think that all we are saying, in the end, is that almost all available studies conducted in recent years demonstrate the finding of ongoing, replicating HCV in various organs, fluids, or compartments, but at very low levels.  I think the studies are also saying that these are not 'remnants' or 'mutants' but actual replicating HCV virions...again, at a very low level.  They are not an uncontrolled, chronic, active HCV infection.  No one has intimated this at all.

How to INTERPRET this or what it all means is, of course open to further research, discussion, etc.  I don't think any of us have tried to say exactly what these findings might imply, or what the impact might be.  I do not see anything above that implies that.  

I regret that you are offended by my comments about why I believe this subject may create emotional responses, or why I believe that the studies listed are the most valid information currently at our disposal, or if my reaction to your "characterization of what I am saying" did not resonate with you, etc.  But I am just answering your comments that were directed toward me.

Now,  I may have some 'other' theories, that I sometimes submit as possible scenarios, etc. and when I do I always state them as my opinion.  But this thread is a different one, and the information is all based on scientific studies, the only ones available on the subject, and are NOT MY opinion in any way, but stand on their own, as research studies and conclusions drawn by those teams of medical professionals.  I may form some opinions as a result of studying these papers, but they were not MY original opinions.  

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
About this time ..... I could use a scotch straight up.  Followed right after by another one.

Of course, I won't.  But right about now I'm sure wishing I could.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Ok, if in fact as proven by the research to date and presented here how dose/do the virus or virions, cleaved, fragmented or whatever exist in the extracellular fluids in and around the organs for extended periods of time after treatment? What is the mechanism or body chemicals that allow them to exist long after treatment?

The research listed suggest that they do, but is there any research as to how?

jasper
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
If there was such a thing as a PCR test that went down to <0, and someone on tx became <0 and was still <0 EOT but then relapsed, I would imagine that everyone would have to agree that mutants or residual virons within compartments replicated and made their way back into the blood.

If a test like will or can be possible someday,, that would help answer some questions cause if nothing was in the blood, how did the person relapse 2 months later or whenever. Right now, many people assume that relapse is from left over virons floating in the blood and the immune system was not able to control/suppress them and yes I would say that is one way to look at it... But maybe they aren't left over in the blood in every situation and are in fact in the tissue/ lymp nodes etc and then make their way back out. Granted it is the immune system that is not able to suppress them if relapse happens,,,,but why do we or some I should say, automatically assume these left overs were in the blood and not left over in compartments that caused relapse? I'll answer that -its because we always say, well the test only goes down to <10 or <2.

MO
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Before the lipid connection is totally dismissed as off topic, is it really?

To: geter
The "floaters' are explained by the lipids that the virus attracts to its outer, partially lipohilic virion coat sections, that make it possible for HCV to protect itself from neutralization by antibodies . This coating is variable for two reasons:

1. Because of the quasispecies/genetic variability of the individual virions, some might have an even better ability than the majority to bind those extra lipids .
2. Due to the stochastic process that underlies the lipoid coating there is some variability - a "distribution" - of lipid coating even with genetically identivcal virions.

The ultracentrifugation steps tries to oversome the floaters by reducing the specific gravity of the serum in which the virions are suspended at the time of centrifugation, thus making them heavier relative to the medium in which they are centrifuged, sending them to the bottom after almost 3 hours of ultracentrifugation.

Geter - It is not so much as the liver protecting it self as it is with the “virus cell” floating around and hitching a ride on the plaque in the veins and in some instances being coated additionally by the tumbling lipids and sticking to the plaque and eventually being encapsulated in it over time which brings me back to the virus cell and the thickness of the cell envelopes which is not soluble and floats at various degrees with in the blood stream in which the cells act as balloons because of the chemical make up of the inner membrane and outer coating and the varying buoyancy of each cell given that make up and coating.

Geter - Hope HR is lurking because I doubt if I’ll remember this scenario, in which all probability is totally wrong but here goes.

Using hr’s example of the ten vials of 1ml of infected blood serum all from the same draw and using ten centrifugal mixers (lack of better word) and set at different speeds among the ten vials what would be the viral content at the various speeds and the viral buoyancy of the virus cell at each speed. Now if going by the different centrifugal speeds and all ten vials show different concentration of virus cells and virion at those different levels what would cause those virus cells and virions to stay buoyant at that given speed, and of that, what would be the thickness of the envelopes in each virus group? In looking at it this way the newly created virus cells and virions would be lighter and would sink to the bottom at the slower speed because they have not had the time to mature and flow through the blood stream and pick up additional protein coatings of its outer cell envelope and in contrast; the maximum centrifugal speed would yield the most hardy of the virus cells and virions because of the length of time floating in the blood system (years) and picking up the additional proteins of insoluble coatings of the outer envelope along the way in which it makes them more buoyant in our water based blood system and would it not make more sense that the newer virus cells and virions get eradicated faster in the beginning of treatment because of this lack of additional protection of each? Sounds far out but to the layman sounds logical for a hepc 101 class minus all the sifi wording.

So, say out of the ten vials centrifuged, vial one has 500k virus cells and virions at the lowest rpm and viral 10 has 5000 of the virus cells and virions at the maximum rpm would it be safe to say that what in the virus cell has made it so resistant to the downward pressure of the spinning centrifuge.

By differentially spinning the virions containing samples one could indeed separate them by their varying density due to the variability in the lipid coating. Why would we do this, however? To possibly "identify" the ones with the thickest lipid coat?
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Obviously the ultracentrifuge uses the highest possible speed and additionally means to reduce the buoyancy of the suspension medium to get the vast majority down.
By the way, once the density of a particular virion is less than the suspending medium, no centrifugal speed in the world will bring them down. They will go to the top, in fact.

Geter - To:

////////  To possibly "identify" the ones with the thickest lipid coat?  /////////

Yes, because these virus cell have learned through the past encodings of previous generations of virions on how to adapt to its changing environment and use any means of survival including learned host dna of the virion strands through the replication cycle process over time in which more of the bodies defensive strategies are learned to combat the virus cell but the evasive maneuvers of the virus has figured out that the more lipid coating protecting it form the opposing forces of the bodies natural inf production and adapting to the treatment drugs over time has made it to what I call, a super virion.

It was interesting when St. George brought up the subject about statins and in the one abstract where (?statin name) was used that there was a VL drop but only temporarily but none the less there was a drop. My thought would be that the initial intake of the statins thinned the lipid coating of the virus cell in which the natural INF was able to penetrate the envelope and eradicate the process of the progression of the evolution of the virus. Just a wag on my part.

But if this did hold true and these virus cell had evolved to this state to where they defy the centrifugal forces of a centrifuge and these are the ones I would be looking at for the reasons of the margin of error and possible the reason for relapse because of the opposing external forces are no longer there and the virus cell by its own internal mechanism would start to shed it harden shell back to a point where the host liver cell becomes attractive again. Also another wag on my part, I think?

The 30% chance was only referring to the 1ml of serum investigated in the test. You could still have 3000 viruses in the non tested other part of the blood and also there will some be located  in the interstitial fluid - outside of blood vessels but also out side of the bodys tissues. that is at least 10 more liters of fluid where a virus can be, although the concentrations in this interstitial space should be less than in the circulation, since the virus is at least partly confined/blocked off  by the endothelium lining of blood vesels.

Note however that in the liver this otherwise fairly tight endothelial lining has numerous large holes (fenestrations)  - to allow better access of plasma components to the liver cells, that actually for this reason  come in direct contact with the plasma alongside the sinusoids, this way there is no barrier for viruses  in the liver capillaries at all.

Geter - So the INF is injected into the body’s intercellular fluid (or makes its way into) and to combat the virus in these fluids and also be absorbed into the blood stream which is why it takes time to build up the INF concentration with in the body. The Riba on the other hand is ingested and absorbed through the intestines and works in reverse by being absorbed into the body. So the virus works in the same way to some extent because some virions make their way through the blood vessel wall in to the body through various channels of the blood vessel which makes it harder for the INF and the Riba to find and explains for the long duration of the treatments.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Geter - So what has changed is, is in the initial up dosing of the combo it has or should have eradicated all most all of the virions in the first 12 weeks of TX for (responders speaking) as UND, and for the remainder of TX is for the remaining TX time is for the body compartments and or organ components in which the virus may or may not find their way back into the blood stream and this is why the post PCR are needed to see if any remaining virions have reentered the blood stream which leads us back to the taper down Theory, at least for me anyway.

*** have interrupted inserted meaning of my understanding of medical terminology used***

Surprisingly, the circulating or otherwise existing in the extracellular fluid virions are only of relevance insofar as they can reinfect new, uninfected hepatocytes , from the blood passing though the liver .

Geter right
All virions that do not reinfect are of importance only insofar as they (or better their processed remnants, taken up by macrophages and dendritic cells.) act as a trigger to the peripheral immune system to produce cognate CTLs and helper T lymphocytes.
Attacking as a foreign invader and eat up any unused and decaying virus cells
The immune system and IFN or riba does not have any direct effect on circulating virions ( with the minor exemption in the case of HCVs minor neutralizing antibodies  ) Killer Cells, nor would such an effect be of any importance in the fight against the infection , unless it would reduce the number of circulating virions to such numbers that reinfections could not occur anymore, (which is a very small number). Reduced viral load by eradicating the number of virions being produced in the liver which is where the cleaving mutilation occurs.

There is really no "virus killing' going on outside of the liver  (because of their lipid coats) in the sense of an active, therapy induced destruction. Because of their RNA make up, Circulating virions have a short life and die by themself in huge numbers, a small number only makes it back  Stronger RNA life cycle and lipid coats, to the liver and finds a fresh hepatocyte to infect and to start a new virus producing intracellular machinery.

The therapy is directed against and works by:

1. Eliminating  Infected hepatocytes by CTL mediated killing / Eating the now dead hepatocytes pads
2. Noncytolytic elimination of the intracellular virus machinery by induction via CTL produced gamma IFN or therapeutically induced IFN alpha . Neutralizing of the central nerve system of the virion
3. Killing of hepatocytes, infected or not, by unspecific "bystander" inflammatory mechanisms caused by the unspecific proinflammatory capable of promoting inflammation, intrahepatic with in the liver, infiltrate and there the diffusion there of, ( In the biopsies seen as portal infiltrates and "necroinflammatory fibrosis and bridging " activity).

4. The prevention of reinfection by anti HCV antibodies binding to circulating virions is not of major importance in the dynamical fight of the immune system against HCV. For that reason hyperimmunserum hyper active immune response in the blood, "HCIG" CD4 binding ability, does not effectively prevent reinfection after transplantation. Currently, two companies are trying to develop a pair of strongly binding anti HCV monoclonals, alfa antibodies in the hope to improve upon this mechanism to prevent reinfection after transplantation. Transplantation BTW is the one moment in which the  extrahepatic out side of the liver virons DO come into play, becuse they reinfect the new, vrgin liver .
your killing me here, I gots a headache
Right, the circulating virions in the blood serum and extracellular fluids can only infect the uninfected hepatocyte pad of the liver. Yet, the floating virions circulating in the serum and extrecellular fluids are either dieing or dead on their own and triggers the “natural INF” response of CTL’s and helper T cells or killer cells that attacks the invader virions and or decaying virus cells, which is over come after the initial infection process begins and ongoing process. Thus reducing the viral load of the virions with in the liver caused by the induced therapy of the combo treatment but there are few who survive either because of their stronger (DNA) for lack of words, and or because of their thicker lipid coats makes and its way back to the liver through the serum to a virgin hepatocytes pads.

Through combo treatment, the infected hepatocytes pad or pads are helped eliminated by CTL target killing of the pad cells and sometimes neighboring cells accentually, eating the cell or cells which may be in the process of inflammation or the possibility of promoting inflammation with in the liver cell pads as seen by the biopsies in the various stages of fibrosis and or bridging.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
233616 tn?1312790796
oh I know, the games must go on!!!   Just musing I guess cause when I first arrived some of these type studies and discourses had me reeling. Time brings perspective.

the plethra of new studies are impossible to keep up with, and I'm lazy, I've begun to rely of this group to bring anything REALLY promising to the group....otherwise I'd be in pubmed and clinical trials all day and my head would spin Linda Blair style by every evening!!!!!!

So let us continue.......funny thing is, my first day in here (in June) someone was chewing people out for giving links and/OR posting long studies.....and yesterday I got chewed for NOT doing it  (although the person above me had just posted the study so why would I)   but still.......it's funny how things change over time isn't it.
stay well, love your posts whether we agree or not...   MB
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Can’t add much more than that to the thread but more speculation than already exist.

jasper
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
For anyone with an interest in this area, I just started a 'Health Pages' page on 'Occult Hep C' - for direct links to studies and papers related to the subject. Feel free to add any relevant materials and help edit and organize it, please.


TnHepGuy
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Sure wished you had posted this about 2 hours ago, would have saved a lot of cut and past, LOL!

Nice to see the Health Page being used on a host of topics.

jasper
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I just spent about an hour trying to rearrange the papers in chronological order on the 'Occult' Health Page. It appears as if the software has some serious bugs over there. After putting things in order I saved it - and the mess that is now there is what the program put up. And, I don't seem to be able to edit any of what is there ...... double whammy. I tried to delete the mess and replace it by C&P'ing a previous 'good' revision. No go. I just keeps putting the same mess back up again.

No time to try and fix it now. I'll see if there's anything more that can be done tomorrow.


TnHepGuy
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Thanks for the Health Pages compendium of articles and studies regarding 'occulr HCV, persistent HCV after SVR, and related topics.  I did not even realize just how many papers had been published documenting and explaining this phenomenon.  For anyone who really wants to understand where we are today with this issue, and what exactly seems to be happening in our bodies after SVR, this listing of studies is the most comprehensive that I have come across.  Thanks for taking the time and trouble to compile all this information, and to make it readily available to all of us.  Great reading for a rainy day!

Reading these studies also makes you realize how much more there is to learn about the virus, and why we can't stop with the current treatment regimes thinking we have solved the riddles, and provided the total cure.  We need lots of follow up to determine what this form of residual infection does to us, what its level of infectivity and transmission might or might not look like, and to also understand more about what the general population really looks like vis-a-vis HCV infection, in all its forms.  

Questions like, does occult HCV occur only in those who have treated...is occult exactly the same entity as 'persistent HCV after SVR, are their many people out there with undetected, antibody-negative HCV occult infections???  Where does this infection originate from in cases where it seems ideopathic?  Does this 'little, compartmentalized infection cause any of the familiar extra-hepatic symptoms///  Does our immune system begin to create auto-immune illnesses or disorders as a result of occult or persistent HCV??? The list of things we need to understand goes on and on.  

I think we are really just at the threshold of understanding regarding the life and behavior of HCV.  The researchers will have a field day exploring all the peripheral issues.

Thanks again for the great resource.

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
The following does not speak to any position I have about post-SVR viral persistence, the role, if any, of PBMC,or the inhabitation of any other cell suspected of a role in the HCV lifecycle. I will get to that pretty soon I hope, as many have raised some very interesting points, and I do have some studies to share that may (or may not)  illuminate some areas of this topic. I would rather wait for now until I can be assured of some continuity on my part--otherwise I'll get lost. Lately my ability to remain focused has been off somewhat.

The following is some science along with a sprinkling of conjecture, and a dash of what  hopefully will appear to be logic. I usually don’t stray too far from the scientific path when it comes to HCV, but speculation can be thought provoking at times and fun to share.

" RNA lifeforms mutate like crazy"-- DD

This is a very good reason why it wouldn’t be necessary for HCV to convalesce or 'hibernate', go dormant,etc, as a means to ensure it’s continued existence. HCV is the fastest mutating virus ever discovered to this point in history. Its apparent survival strategy is quite simple--mutate so fast that the immune system is overwhelmed. A plan of diversion on a grand scale---from thousands to millions of mutations (quasi-species) per lifecycle by each infective virion. And every one of them is unique.( It is through this process that new genotypes/subtypes will rise. )

HCV seeks its lowest state of free energy. Don't we all ? ;) Another way of stating this is to say that through phylogenesis it has become as efficient as possible . To illustrate this phenomenon consider the following: HCV in its past history has shed replication mechanisms that were at one time needed for its survival. As we all know HCV cannot replicate by itself. It relies on its innate ability to manipulate the host cell’s replication processes to produce viral copies for it. This leads many evolutionary biologists to surmise that at one time in the  history of HCV  it must have had the ability to replicate using its own viral properties.Once the virus eventually unlocked the ‘code’ of a host cells replicating mechanisms it no longer needed to expend any energy on replication---a process which it previously had needed for survival. The ‘parts’ of the viral assembly that allowed the virus to self-replicate were eventually eliminated (devolution) or shed, in the never ending goal towards maximum efficiency (lowest energy state).  For HCV to develop and/or keep another mechanism for survival when it already possesses one that requires almost zero energy (extremely efficient) while at the same time being unbelievably prodigious (an almost perfect machine), would be an expenditure of energy that would appear to be antithetical to the goal of reaching its lowest state of energy (becoming most efficient). It would serve the virus absolutely no purpose to develop (or keep) another process for survival, such as entering cells to 'hide', especially since doing so has never been shown to result in a release,delayed or otherwise of infective HCV back into the sera where it could be available for an opportunity to infect a new host.  If HCV is to succeed in its drive to remain in existence it  is absolutely imperative that infective forms of the virus are readily available whenever a transmission vector presents itself.  Being blood borne necessarily limits HCV in the opportunities it will have to ensure its perpetuity. Passing infection via blood to blood contact is one of the most inefficient means of transference known.  (Let’s pray it stays this way so that HCV, as well as a host of other viruses, never mutate to ‘aerosol’ form).  Since these events of exposure are rare and cannot be predicted, the virus can ill afford the luxury of ‘hiding’, going dormant, or convalescing for very long if it wants to continue to be.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
250084 tn?1303311035
  And again....all I pull up when I copy/paste that sight (as others I try here) it brings up this post, not the article. What am I doing wrong? Want to read that!

LL
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
First, this is NOT my quote, so I do not know where the "DD" came from:

" RNA lifeforms mutate like crazy"-- DD  < (not my DD, or comment)
Someone else must have posted the above comment.

Secondly, I think your above description and explanation is interesting, but assumes that the virus must be trying to 'hide', and therefore you proceed to negate that possibility.  I do not think it is 'hiding', or anything like that.  I believe, from what I am reading in the various studies, that the virus has been placed under immune system 'control' and is not likely to be doing anything at all of its own accord, but is just being kept at extremely low levels by the immune system.  Maybe the immune system cannot fully exterminate the virus in these circumstances, and maybe in some people it eventually does.  Hence the 10% or so that show up as having no persistent virus in PBMC, Lymph Nodes, Hepatocytes, etc.  I think the virus may still be alive and well in the serum also, after the SVR, but at extremely low levels, under the limits of standard detection.  It could be randomly at 1 copy / 20 IU of serum for instance, and would NEVER be detected on the most sensitive PCR tests.  This would explain the six people who continued to go from undetected to very low level detected.  Maybe the immune system varies in its ability to keep the virus at extremely low levels in the blood, and sometimes allows little detectable fluctuations to occur.  

Finally, what you described is interesting to ponder, but is contradicted by the cold hard facts in every one of the linked research studies, but one, the initial linked study at the top of the thread. (and the study you linked did not use the most powerful amplified testing to look for the virus, either).

  If the virus is showing up, and is detected by special amplified testing, and is replicating, then explaining why theoretically it cannot really happen becomes an exercise in futility, and an academic construct.  If its there, then its there, and whether we theorize that it should not behave that way, or not, is a moot point. Its there.  We need to figure out HOW it remains at low levels, and what the significance of this residual infection might be.  Thats my take anyway.   Let's also place DD notations on things that DD has said.  Thanks.

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
148588 tn?1465782409
The next logical step to deconstructing the evolution of the virus is that at one time it may have been an useful symbiote rather than a parasite (see mikesimon's recent posting about post transplant patients who beome totally virus free).  A virus that only causes fatal complications in 20% of the population, and that generally not till later in life, wouldn't have any deselection pressures on it in a country like Afghanistan where the average lifespan is under 50. Even less so in Northern Europe 1000 years ago where the lifespan was even lower.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I just re-did the Health Page on occult. I decided it would be much easier to do if I started again from scratch. Along the way I figured out how to do direct linking (i.e. - the article title is also the link) - thus cutting in half the amount of screen usage and scroll time. I've titled the newest page "Occult Hepatitis C (1)" and asked MedHelp to please remove the first page - after which I will then re-title the new version.

Please add to and update it with any any-and-all relevant materials. If you are not comfortable yet with posting, just send or show me the link and I will add it.

Thanks.


TnHepGuy
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
In my case as far as virons and relapse, I think I am in a Th2 mode and might be stuck there. I thought of the parasites as a distraction to my immune system (kept my immune system from fighting the left over virons) - didn't know how else to word it to my doctors, being I am not from a scientific backround, but as I look a bit deeper and try to grasp things, I might have been on that money about that cause it seems (if I interpreted it correctly) that the paras trick the immune system into thinking the Th1 is present and helping but its not and you wind up just having the Th2 thing going on which if you think about it, at the end of treatment you would need a balance of Th1/Th2 after tx stops in order to suppress any lingering virons.

The reason I concern myself about being stuck in a Th2 mode - not due to paras - they are gone, but it seems that there are other reasons where a person can become Th2 dominant - even past Chronic Fatigue and FM and also chronic stress can make you Th2 dominant. Don't take my word, look it up if you want to make sure my interpretation was correct, but I think it was. Too tired to go thru my bookmarks to paste - so I added the disclaimer so I don't hear feedback,,"where's the studies etc."

So anyhow, I have to talk to my doctor about the Th2 mode and possibility of me being stuck in it. I'm sure he'll want to throw me out the window, but I have to ask.

MO

Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
This sure has been one heck of a thread!  Pro or con, good, bad, or ugly I have really appreciated all the participation and commentary.  TnHepGuy...thanks for the useful Health Pages resource!  Willing....thanks for always being willing!  Mr. Liver, thanks for kicking this thing off!    jmjm, as always, appreciate the voice of moderation, and the contrarian point of view.  I have not given this subject so much thought and consideration in a long time (a good or bad thing, I am not really sure).

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Well DD, I guess your thread is now officially closed. Take a bow! Applause!

gee
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
DD: (thanks) always, appreciate the voice of moderation, and the contrarian point of view.
------------------  
Well, thanks, but I'm not about to concede that it's my point of view that is "contrarian" ;)
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
And well you shouldn't!    I got word recently that you were a messenger from that new show, The Prevailing View!  Now I've watched the show, and I am just waiting around for the credits to roll.  I just know we are all going to see some really 'meaty' studies to support the theme of this new show.  And when I do, you will have convinced me, and I will have to become a regular cast member too.  For now I guess I'll just stay in the back of the bus, and throw peanuts!  Oh well, we can't all be stars.

DoubleDose

Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
tn: EXCELLENT WORK! there is something endearing and therapeutic about the endless repetition and rediscovery that goes on around here, but, ultimately, it's both tiresome and conterproductive. Thisi is the perfect remedy and I hope it will serve as a model for gathering research findings on other ever-popular topics like anti-fibrotics, mj/alcohol consumption, extended tx etc.

LadyL : maybe try using tn's links to go to the study you want and compare that with the URL in the cut/paste text?

Desrt/DD:
In that truncated genomes paper :
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17935188
only one of the three patients was hiv con-infected. This was a very rare set of patients indeed : no antibodies and plenty  of serum VL ( in the millions) unlike Castillo's group where "occult" was defined as no serum and no abs, but hcv rna in hepatocytes. I read through the paper in more detail and from their references it seems that truncated/defective genomes of this sort are common in other contexts but have not been reported previously in HCV. Though this is very much a corner case, it represents a dramatic example of the virus evading basic immunological mechanism.

Their PCRs strategy divided the genome in half, 5K being apparently a practical upper bound on length of a PCR extension.  By assembly, they were able to extract full sequences which are deposited with genbank accession numbers DQ430811-DQ430820.

The practical question in all this, at least from my point of view, is determinants of relapse. If it's not absence of virus that separates SVRs from relapsers it seems important to understand whether   host or viral factors play the major role in outcome. I may be jumping to conclusions a bit here, but I tend to see this as supporting a re-tx approach that relies on using SOC in the earlier part of therapy and the hcv-targeted, precision ammo like r-1626 and vx/bocepravir later. Why count on long-term stimulation of  an immune response that can be so blatantly evaded?

Also, that spinal disk paper, had no bearing whatsoever on spinal fluid; different tissue type, my mistake.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
For starters.....I quote you:  DD:  "Free and open rational discussion is the name of the game. "

I posted what I thought was a reasonable comment that started "Consider tuberculosis".  I was knocked on my A$$ by the vehemence of your response.  For a person who claims to want to encourage truth-seeking and open discussion and participation by all, you have a funny way of showing it.  

I wouldn't have minded a bit if you had respectfully disagreed and pointed out, with references, where my conjectures didn't add up.  I don't post in forums to be right.  I post in forums to learn by participating in discussions and to have my own as-of-today opinions tested by the knowledge of others so that I can learn more.

Instead, you reverted to what amounts to "discussion thread rage" and engaged in personally attacking me and casting aspersions on my character.  How is this supposed to encourage the search for truth and encourage others to want to participate in forums like this and to venture an opinion for others to respond to so that they too can learn, watching how you attacked me?  Should we have read a certain number of studies before we are allowed to post a thought or an opinion?  Should we only be allowed to post if we agree with YOU? It certainly seems that way.

You say this to me:  
"Why do you choose not to hear what is being said, and read what has been posted?  Its hard to reason with someone who ignores what they want to, and then labels everything as 'conjecture' that they do not wish to understand.  I really can't discuss anything on this level.  The 'proof' regarding 'persistent virus' has been posted, published, disseminated widely, and discussed thoroughly on the forum over the past few years.  Its your choice to ignore it, but please stop calling scientific data and results 'conjecture'."  

I tell you that I am angered and insulted by your accusations (particularly because you keep repeating the same accusations and any time on these forums would tell you they are baseless), you have the utter audacity to respond as follows:

"I am not in any way trying to insult you or accuse you of anything, but am trying to point out why I hold a particular viewpoint"

Huh?  How about you re-read what you wrote to me.  You accuse me of quite a bit and frankly your comments are an INCREDIBLE insult. If you were not TRYING to insult me, well you managed to insult me WITHOUT trying.

In response to your attacking post, I responded calmly explaining why I used the "conjecture" approach and perspective.  I posted very specific questions inviting a response as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trish:  From the bit I've read, it seemed to me that the only scientifically proven conclusion so far... is that existence of strains of HCV RNA in some form exist in body compartments and fluids other than the brain.  Nothing scientifically proven about how it got there nor what the implications are .. just that it has been found.  

If I missed that part ... I'm open to being pointed to it.  I just haven't had time to delve into it more than what I have to date.  

So..
HAS it been scientifically PROVEN how these strains got to these other body compartments and fluids?
HAS it been scientifically proven what the implications of this are?
IS there concrete data to support the two questions I have just asked?

If not... we are still at the conjecture stage on those two questions.  

If yes...then I am open to correcting my viewpoint once I've read the data that makes enough sense to me to do that. "
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the post that followed this one of mine, with this very painstaking clear explanation of my position and posing these very clearly posited questions, YOU TOTALLY COMPLETELY IGNORE THESE QUESTIONS.  

You say this:  "How to INTERPRET this or what it all means is, of course open to further research, discussion, etc.  I don't think any of us have tried to say exactly what these findings might imply, or what the impact might be.  I do not see anything above that implies that.  "

Well......isn't that what CONJECTURE is?????   The INTERPRETATION of these studies, and what they mean?  And isn't that pretty much what I said only different?  

If, to quote you again, ""How to INTERPRET this or what it all means is, of course open to further research, discussion, etc."  I submit that IS conjecture, to venture an opinion on the interpretation, and that is ALL I was doing in my "Consider tuberculosis" post and by saying that we are ALL conjecturing because we are ALL interpreting and deciding what these studies mean.  







Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Continued and concluding......

THEN.. you don't stop there.  You go on to say THIS...

"I regret that you are offended by my comments about why I believe this subject may create emotional responses, or why I believe that the studies listed are the most valid information currently at our disposal, or if my reaction to your "characterization of what I am saying" did not resonate with you, etc.  But I am just answering your comments that were directed toward me."

Uh....no.....I was clearly offended by your personal attacks on ME and SAID SO.  Yet you ignore that completely and instead make the unfounded and baseless comment that I am offended by your comments on your beliefs on this subject. That has no resemblance whatsoever to what I said.  That is not ethical on your part and you sidestep the responsibility for your comments by further maligning me with misrepresentation of my words.  If anyone is choosing to ignore the truth, you are choosing to ignore my clearly stated issues with your personal attacks on me!!!

Incredulously, in conclusion you state:  

"Now,  I may have some 'other' theories, that I sometimes submit as possible scenarios, etc. and when I do I always state them as my opinion.  But this thread is a different one, and the information is all based on scientific studies, the only ones available on the subject, and are NOT MY opinion in any way, but stand on their own, as research studies and conclusions drawn by those teams of medical professionals.  I may form some opinions as a result of studying these papers, but they were not MY original opinions.   "

Yes, this thread is based on a scientific study.  Yet....our interpretation of those studies, in your own words.. are our own individual opinions.  It seems you are free to have yours but anyone who differs from you is not accorded the same privilege without being subjected to tirades and personal insults and attacks from you.

Frankly, I was looking forward to taking some time this weekend to read up on some of the studies posted here.. and become better acquainted with the subject matter and participate in ongoing discussions and having my horizons expanded by having the benefit of having further discussion in this thread.  

Your responses are hypocritical of a person who claims that, and I quote you again:

"Free and open rational discussion is the name of the game. "  

In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya...." I do not tink that means what you tink that means" ... perhaps paraphrased, but that's the basic gist of it.

Trish
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I am not quite sure how to respond to your long diatribe at me.  I think you are greatly over-reacting to my comments, and reading a lot of personal stuff into them.  Please, let's get back to the facts in the research.  I have become weary of trying to answer you in a sensible manner.  I don't think that I am the one engaging in 'tirades' and personal attacks.  I think you are reading way, way more into my comments than what was intended.  And, I have a right to respond to your criticisms and 'rants' just as well as you do. Believe me, no one is 'maligning you!  You seem to be screeching the insults and accusations,judging  from your post above.  Let's move on!

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I also just went back ane rer-ead all your posts to me, and my replies, and for the life of me I can find NO personal attacks at all from my end.  But I do find you saying some pretty inflammatory things directed toward me, early on in the conversation.  (which I let roll right off my back).  I am concerned that you give yourself the latitude to make all sorts of comments to me, and misinterpret what I am trying to say, and then act as if my responses, detailing my position on this subject, are in some way insulting!  I really am offended myself right now, and do not appreciate your interpretation of my intentions.  If you want to get into a debate on a subject, then at least have a thick enough skin to deal with the replies to what you have said.  Look at the things you said to ME!  I should be very offended.

I am not amused by your attitude and do not agree one bit with your characterization.

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
DD:  I don't think that I am the one engaging in 'tirades' and personal attacks.  I think you are reading way, way more into my comments than what was intended.  And, I have a right to respond to your criticisms and 'rants' just as well as you do. Believe me, no one is 'maligning you!  You seem to be screeching the insults and accusations,judging  from your post above.  Let's move on!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back atcha.


Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
DD:  But I do find you saying some pretty inflammatory things directed toward me, early on in the conversation.  (which I let roll right off my back). ........ Look at the things you said to ME!  I should be very offended.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I recall nothing of the sort in this thread, however, quote them like I quoted you.  THEN I will make my apologies if required.  
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Tho at the end of tx and barely a brain left... and with my eyeballs hurting, taking close to  3 hrs to read this thread- you all done good! very, very interesting!!!  bookmarked it, as well as when feeling better (lol) will read the TnHepGuy Healthpage w/links.  just too much to take in now.  anyone saying this scares newbies or people tx'g is full of malarky (sorry but that's my humble opnion).  this is interesting, fascinating reading and hoping more and more research is done, and hopefully find a 'real' cure someday.. but until then this is the best we've got. frankly I'm one of the ones liking to know ... 'cause don't think all stones have been turned and really when feeling better will be watching this!!!  I WANT to know and really interested in this research!!  ah... DD- I imagine your inbox is full of many commending your 'patience' ...God Bless You!  All-in-all just a fricken great thread!!  THANKS... to all providing links!!!!!!!  Libby
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Not only are you educating, but also entertaining me at the same time.  Such a wonderful group of creative people you are!!!!! THANKS  Leah  
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Whoops... didn't mention 'entertaining', but actually I didn't see that as much as I found part of the thread annoying and sad that interested parties such as ourselves have to wade through such opposition when 'studies' and 'papers relating to occult hep c' are being discussed in a reasonable manner - with DIRECT LINKS to same, I might add.  If a person feels uncomfortable reading such discussion or do not want to see what research is out there, why must they attack the messengers and those having open minds wanting to discuss same?  I mean.. for chripes-sakes... if opposing parties have STUDIES, PAPERS, LINKS from RESEARCHERS (DUH) showing that what is attempting to be discussed here then by all means I wish they would show it.  I'm tired and sick and really have discovered with this thread what members I can skip,  and not miss, since my eyeballs feel like their turning inside out - just my take.... lol  Yeah.. I'm just one hoping for continued discussions in this very interesting subject. Sheesh... just my humble opinion!
Again, thanks MrLiver, DD, Jmjm, Willing, TnhepGuy and others parties discussing this in a mature manner.  THIS IS SO INTERESTING.   Sure it be a lot easier to put my head in sand (lol) or hands over ears.. lol ... just hoping this has not stopped anyone from these interesting discussion - - Please don't let nonsense bother you -doesn't take a course in rocket science to see what is going on here and none of the personal attacks are reflected on those sincere in these discussion... just my humble opinionn.. and take for what its worth  Be well
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Here we go again.  I don't oppose this.  I'm learning about this.  I posted what I thought was a reasonable thought on this.  I asked what I thought were reasonable questions.  And I got no direct answers, instead I got told what kind of person I was thought to be.  If you go back and read, despite my first "cough" post, every post of mine to DD was reasonable and calm.  He attacked me anyway.  Now YOU are attacking me using the same sort of reasoning.

I do not oppose this.  Neither do I support this.  I am simply learning about it.  I have even said that my position is based on what I personally have read to date, that I have not had time to read further studies, that I am open to changing my position once I read those further studies.  That does not mean that I will AGREE with DD, Willing, MS, or whomever, once I DO read those studies.  IS that allowed in this forum?  Disagreement?  It does not appear so.

If you go back up and read... the very FIRST attack in this thread was by DD himself.  I suppose if it's a crony, that is allowed?

I even posted calmly back to DD and stated why I used the word conjecture.  And he uses the same frame of reference as me and I asked him very direct questions about that, that he did not answer.  And the attacks continue.

I am learning here.  And it appears you are only allowed to learn if you follow like a sheep and follow the crowd with no independent thought allowed.  As a point of reference, to calm DD down, I used the global warming situation to illustrate a situation where there are very credible people with the same data yet who interpret that data very differently.....really as a plea to allow differing points of view into this discussion without it devolving into attacking people who have different points of view so that discussion can be had.  Instead... I got the accusation thrown at me that I am suggesting that the scientists who are responsible for the studies that Willing posted and DD references are simply trying to score political points.

Frankly ...every time I've posted what I thought was a reasonable post .. I've had it twisted and I've been attacked for what it was interpreted to be.  THEN the attacks became on me as a person....saying that basically I choose to be ignorant, I choose to be biased, I choose not to learn and that I choose to believe whatever is convenient.
ANYONE who truly knows ME ... would fall on their a$$e$ laughing...and I suppose, knowing the nugget of who I am .. I find such accusations incredibly hurtful and offensive.

This has all started from the assumption that I am here to oppose and attack.  

I resent your subtle accusations, EspritLibre.  I tried to set things aside .. and I tried to get back to the discussion at hand by posting the comment that started.. "Consider Tuberculosis" .. .and yet the attacks continued.  The response to that post was incredible.  And it only got worse.

And now... here you are.  Continuing this.  And yet .. I still do not have the answers to my questions.. that I felt were fair, reasonable, open-minded, demonstrated the desire to seek knowledge and truth .. and yet the only response.. is sidestepping and more attacks.  So ... I will post them yet again....and if I do not get a fair and reasonable response to those questions.. without attacks.. I will know that it is not ME who is the one with blinders on.  Why would someone.. who isn't interested in seeking knowledge.. ask such questions.  I shake my head at your comments.  I truly do.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
To: DD
Hm.  Out of the few studies I have had time, to read .. I didn't think I'd read anything about HOW the HCV mutants got to where they got to and definitive proof on that.. only that they exist.  Did I miss something?  And I'm not being facetious when I ask that question.  

From the bit I've read, it seemed to me that the only scientifically proven conclusion so far... is that existence of strains of HCV RNA in some form exist in body compartments and fluids other than the brain.  Nothing scientifically proven about how it got there nor what the implications are .. just that it has been found.  

If I missed that part ... I'm open to being pointed to it.  I just haven't had time to delve into it more than what I have to date.  

So..
HAS it been scientifically PROVEN how these strains got to these other body compartments and fluids?
HAS it been scientifically proven what the implications of this are?
IS there concrete data to support the two questions I have just asked?

If not... we are still at the conjecture stage on those two questions.  

If yes...then I am open to correcting my viewpoint once I've read the data that makes enough sense to me to do that.

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of all your accusations.  

I'm not "choosing" to ignore what has been read.  
I'm not ignoring what I wish to and choosing to label it as conjecture.
I'm not making active choices about what I choose to understand and what I don't.

This is simply as far as I've gotten on what I have read already.  It would be reckless for me to call my own viewpoint anything BUT conjecture and unless I see that there is definitive data supporting the two questions I've asked above....it all remains conjecture to me on THOSE questions - A) how it gets there (does it mutate off? Is it independent from the HCV RNA in the blood?  etc etc) .. and B) what the implications are.  I accept that it exists.

Your ongoing accusations anger and insult me.  I would appreciate it if you would quit painting me as a close-minded fearful ignorant person who is not interested in the truth and would prefer to hide her head in the sand.  I would appreciate it .. but I'm not holding my breath that you will stop.

*Footnote.  I think it is a very good thing that I did not hold my breath, especially since it appears that the pack is growing.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Sheesh!!!!  Well, now I guess you can see how I feel.  I am just not responding to the stuff above anymore!  Its a waste ot time and energy.  Glad to have you on the Forum.  I hope you continue to enjoy the discussions!

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
EspritLibre:  Whoops... didn't mention 'entertaining', but actually I didn't see that as much as I found part of the thread annoying and sad that interested parties such as ourselves have to wade through such opposition when 'studies' and 'papers relating to occult hep c' are being discussed in a reasonable manner - with DIRECT LINKS to same, I might add.  If a person feels uncomfortable reading such discussion or do not want to see what research is out there, why must they attack the messengers and those having open minds wanting to discuss same?  I mean.. for chripes-sakes... if opposing parties have STUDIES, PAPERS, LINKS from RESEARCHERS (DUH) showing that what is attempting to be discussed here then by all means I wish they would show it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps you could use some independent thought of your own, or wait until your eyeballs have recovered and read what I actually posted, rather than only DD's tirades and incorrect assumptions about my posts that I CONSTANTLY have to go back and correct because he has quite the knack for reading into everything I say.



I thought it was a discussion about strains of HCV RNA getting into various other compartments of the body besides blood and what the implications are.  

In DD's own words:  "How to INTERPRET this or what it all means is, of course open to further research, discussion, etc.  I don't think any of us have tried to say exactly what these findings might imply, or what the impact might be.  I do not see anything above that implies that.  "

IS it?  IS it open to interpretation?  Further research?  Further discussion?  

Then why am I being attacked for choosing to read the studies, then ask questions about my own interpretations to date, posting my opinions on same?  

Despite DD's comments, it seems that the interpretation has already been decided, the research to date is already conclusive and no further discussion is required other than for everyone to simply agree with the conclusions of those who feel they are right.

There is nothing wrong with feeling secure in what you have come to believe.  But do not state something like "How to INTERPRET this or what it all means is, of course open to further research, discussion, etc.  I don't think any of us have tried to say exactly what these findings might imply, or what the impact might be.  I do not see anything above that implies that.  "  if you are not willing to allow others the same right to do the same investigation, ask the same questions and come to their own personal conclusions.

I am not a sheep.  Have never been a sheep.  Last time I looked this is not a cult and any who are not true followers and don't toe the party line get ex-communicated..however, I am beginning to wonder on the "cult" thing because this discussion has taken on overtones of that sort of thing.

How about...instead of you continuing false accusations against me..... you actually answer my earnestly posted questions as I would REALLY like answers to those.  
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I was hoping to leave this thread for good, but you being a new member here, who just started treatment –  I wanted to add that while these threads no longer raise my hair as they did when I treating – I do share your frustration at how DD mischarterizes and personally attacks those who disagree.

He often insinuates that this topic gets people emotional and defensive, but it’s obvious to anyone reading this thread that he’s the one who gets emotional and defensive, as soon as anyone disagrees or calls him to task.

This is not a topic I’ve researched thoroughly, so have limited my comments mostly to what I consider DD’s incorrect conclusions (or however many ways he qualifies his statements)`from the study data he himself presents. And I do mention on occasion – thought it pertinent this time since  we got into this whole “prevailing view” nonsense -- what some of my doctors have said.

Instead of DD simply saying that that in his opinion the study data doesn’t support my doctor’s opinions – he chooses to attack and mock both me and the doctors. This is par for the course.

Trish, you’re on treatment now, the drugs can be rough, and really should garner your energy to that end. My only suggestion is to eiher ignore threads like these, or simply post your opinions and ignore what invariably will be a personally directed, ad hominem response.

Speaking of ad hominem, I'm of course doing the same right now   (talking about the person and not the topic) and for that I’m not at all happy, but felt it should be said, at least for your sake as someone both new here, and obviously someone very bright who has picked up many of these topics quite well in a relatively short period of time.

And taking my advice, I’m leaving this thread and going to enjoy the weekend. No need to respond.

All the best,

-- Jim
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Jim,  I am sorry you feel that I 'mocked you', but a little bit of light hearted humor should not get anyone that bent out of shape.  For someone who comes on as the resident 'know it all' ,and has been called to task on that behavior by other members in the past, you least of all should be calling the kettle black!  I am disappointed that you take my disagreement with your interpretation of this viral persistence issue so personally.  And I do think there may be more going on than many doctors realize, but I am not mocking them or you!  I am just saying that research may be ahead of their current views.

And for you to give a 'free pass' to the person you addressed above, for all the twisted misinterpretations she has been spewing out, I am really disappointed in you.  I thought you were more rational and objective than to do that.  You sound like someone who's ego has been offended, and you are lashing out to feel better.  I mean really!  Read all of her responses.

I always gave you credit for trying to look a both sides of an issue, and 'trying' to remain above the garbage, but today you just took a big swan dive right into it.  People can disagree with me all they want to, and they do frequently, but it does not bother me in the slightest, contrary to what you seem to think about my attitudes and behaviors.  

You strike me as the guy who can't handle it when someone contradicts your 'authoritative pronouncements', and today you just made it perfectly clear.  

So if you feel entitled to define me in your above post, then here is my synopsis for you.  It goes both ways Jim.

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
DD:  or all the twisted misinterpretations she has been spewing out,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Qualify that, for you are surely speaking of me.  Quote my twisted misinterpretations.  I have surely quoted yours.  Quote mine.    

You insinuate that I am purposely twisting and misinterpreting.  I am doing nothing of the sort.  I am asking questions, conjecturing, forming opinions.....and you attack me each time.  You have consistently twisted MY words and I have been forced to come back to you each time and correct what you have said so that nobody will think that what I meant is how YOU have interpreted it.  It is beyond me how you can read into my posts each and every time I post them something that has nothing to do with what I was intending to convey.  All I can conclude is that the glasses you are wearing are so tainted that you are not capable of clear thinking any longer.

On that note....and with constant evidence to support that thought....I will read the studies posted as I said I was interested in doing, I will then read the comments posted here including your own because I am interested in various takes on those studies and I will continue to seek and learn.  What I will NOT do .. .is discuss it further with you.  I have been part of discussions on this topic with you before and they all devolve to the same point.  As they say.. the definition of insanity is to do the same thing expecting different results.  It is clear that it is insanity expecting to have a fair and open discussion with you on THIS topic.  Perhaps other topics it would be possible.  But not THIS one.  Whatever your personal investment in this topic is....you are too threatened by other points of view to engage in rational discussion.

Regards.

Trish

Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
You've gotta be kidding, right?

I am done responding to you, so read and research and enjoy.  Bud do not engage me any further, in any way.  Thanks you.

DD
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Hey trish, don't let him get to ya. He did the same thing to me back when I was treating. I spent from 05 thru 07 on this forum ( I didn't read all of the 100 posts above, but I hope someone has explained to you that this is a pattern with DD) treating and spent lots of time on this forum while I was on tx since I was in bed 90% of the time! Im SVR now (HOORAY) and don't visit often now that I feel good again! My POV:

In a nutshell, he thinks in spite of the fact he cleared the virus, that somehow it is responsible for his ( and his families' believe it or not!?) current ills. He has blamed almost every common human ailment under the sun on HCV and he uses these " persistent/occult" studies to try to shore up his theory. Needless to say, this current study isn't helping his argument.
Honestly, I came to the conclusion after reading his exhaustive posts for years that he and his family might be suffering from some enviormental pollution or allergies given the symptoms he described but he was not receptive to the idea it was anything other than HCV had come to attack he AND his family in some hidden way in spite of being SVR and in spite of his family never having had HCV.
I say this so you don't waste your energy trying to have a discussion with him on this subject. First, all the info on both sides of the aisle are theory at this point, there is no defined "truth" but thousands and thousands of SVR patients showing not one scintilla of evidence of illness from HCV speaks volumes to me. My doc is on the YOU ARE CURED WHEN YOU SVR team, and that is good enough for me. There are docs in the maybe you aren't cured camp yet they can't offer up documentation for that position, I think they say that to cover liabilities, personally.
A perponderence of evidence shows that SVR after treatment with Interferon/Riba = CURED.
You can't rationalize with irrational people, so don't waste your breath. You need it for your treatment!
I do try to read some here and try to contribute as feeble as those attempts have been lately. I am full tilt back into getting my business off the ground and busy and thanks to SVR have the energy to do so!
There are many new people here that seem like wonderful additions to the crowd including you.
I hope tx isn't being too hard on you. Someone taught me a trick here long ago that really worked for me well and it was to look BACK and be proud of all the days you have done rather than focusing on all the days ahead that can seem to stretch on forever. It helps in those discouraging moments!
Hang in there and don't forget to drink that water!
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Gee, thanks for the nice and supportive comments.  Maybe next time you respond to a thread you could actually read it first, as you state that you did not do.  I remember you were the one who always jumped all over me when I discussed the studies on persistent virus, and like some others, reacted angrily when I asked questions that you didn't like.

Your comments above show exactly what you are all about.  We were discussing the validity of various research studies having to do with occult HCV, early in the thread, before you barged in and started slinging mud.  No need to actually read anything though, because that has always been your style.  Willing, and TnHepGuy listed a long array of studies regarding finding persistent replicating virus after SVR.  If you want to attack that premise, go right ahead.  It just reveals your scientific approach to the subject.

Would you like to contact the research doctors in the various studies to tell them what you think?  In the meantime, instead of recklessly attacking someone without even think about the context, or without reading the posts, why not just go back to whatever...Oh never mind!
,  

You don't want to see studies, or discuss science, you just want to slam people who do not share your point of view, or who pose difficult questions.  Yes, I remember you very well.

DoubleDose
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
233616 tn?1312790796
If you follow the premise of shingles virus being the reememergence of chicken pox left hiding in the spine, then it follows anything is possible. If you read of the demylinization of former polio victims in later life, you can readily conclude that things that weaken us at any time of life can also predispose us to later injury. There's even research linking the Hep A and B vaccines with a greater risk of diebetes....nice to know after they forced vaccinations of every child....the research not withstanding.

The thing is, you can be cured of cancer, defined as 5 years free of any sign of the disease and yet still get a reemergence of that same cancer 10 years later.
Why the same cancer becomes the question then.

that's not to say we know the reasons or will soon. Does that cancer have a genetic origin or a trigger such as a virus, or something even smaller we do not yet know of.
Something we may need more than an electron microscope t even see....it's still a possibility. One we can hpe is not true, but yet we know there are flks who will explore it...because they want to find AND kill it...i.e. cure us.....for which we all should be greatful...grateful even if, and while, it may scare us.

I'm not saying any of this to scare anyone, or defend anyone's position, just saying....
it wasn't long ago doctors thought is was an insane idea that there were even germs, or that thye should wash their hands...

we've come a long way since then, and have further to go.

Meanwhile, we are all effected with being brn into a world where we will be coated with billions of bacteria on our skin, in our throats, and thrughout our systems from birth to death...and none get by without being host to billions of critters.......we are covered in them...to the same extent our planet is covered with trees and people.....and sooner or later.....we will return to the dust we came from....irregardless.


My concern is not...will something come back in years, my cancer may, it been gone 14 years and I lose no sleep but hey, and my HCV could, assuming I ever get to SVR which I haven't...but meanwhile I try t comfort myself that those who are around me  are relatively safe, and not sick from years of my saliva etc...because otherwise I'd go bonkers...and because lives lived in fear are full of torment...because each day is a present, our only present, we just need to focus on how to best live each one out.

maryB
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
I didn't know how you arrived at that description: "voice of moderation".
I was going to post then but I figured I'd let it go. Well, I did but as it tuned out it's clear that it wasn't even close to being accurate.
Mike
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
264121 tn?1313033056
I sometimes wonder, and I'm sure this is unpopular, but I wonder if there aren't a small percentage of people, who continue to abuse substances after or during treatment - thus causing risk of reinfection.

Due to the fact that I was a social worker prior to going into sales, I realize that the first place some people find out they have HCV is in jail.  Others find out while selling their blood - or is it plasma? I can''t remember which - but at any rate, it's frequently done to help support a drug habit.  

So these people just out jail and people with substance abuse issues are at higher risk of using again either during or after their treatment.  And I don't know that they would necessarily tell researchers.  I suppose there is some monitoring of the blood to test for other substances during studies, but I'm equally certain it could be fooled if someone wanted to badly enough.

Anyway, it would explain viral loads after tx.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Avatar universal
Thank you TnHepGuy and all others participating in putting the Health Page "OCCULT HEPATITIS C" together.  http://www.medhelp.org/health_pages/Hepatitis/Occult-Hepatitis-C/show/54?cid=64
As mentioned yesterday, after giving my eyes a well needed/deserved rest, I would  return to examine thoroughly each link (Studies/Conclusions - Occult HCV) on the HEALTH PAGE.   I noticed as I read through a link, to the right there would be 'links of interest'... wow - but reading further, I would see that too would be listed - so this is an extensive AND APPRECIATED list!!!  This is very interesting research going back to 2004, as well as presently ongoing research.  I find it fascinating and have appreciated everyone's input on this.  Again... keep this info and discussion going!  We are all in a learning stage... even researchers themselves!   Although there's room to debate speculation, we certainly cannot refute what's been evidenced.  Thank you for gathering all the studies all into one easy area to access!!  
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Comment
Post Comment
Your Answer
Avatar universal
Answer
Do you know how to answer? Tap here to leave your answer...
Answer
Answer
Post Answer
A
A
Answer a few simple questions about your Hep C treatment journey.

Those who qualify may receive up to $100 for their time.
Explore More In Our Hep C Learning Center
image description
What Is Hepatitis C?
Learn about this treatable virus.
image description
Diagnosing Hepatitis C
Getting tested for this viral infection.
image description
Just Diagnosed? Here’s What’s Next
3 key steps to getting on treatment.
image description
Understanding Hepatitis C Treatment
4 steps to getting on therapy.
image description
Your Guide to Hep C Treatments
What you need to know about Hep C drugs.
image description
Managing Side Effects of Treatment
How the drugs might affect you.
image description
Making Hep C Treatment a Success
These tips may up your chances of a cure.
Recent Activity
Hepatitis C Community Resources