Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy

never mind, rich. i see it all here
http://www.projectdaylily.com/

The Project Day Lily story chronicles the events surrounding what the public knows as “The Gulf War Syndrome” or “Gulf War Illnesses.” To this day, the public perception of that tragedy is very limited, and no one seems to remember or knows what really happened. Many veterans went to the Gulf War as healthy individuals and returned with chronic ailments and an unusual infection that they inadvertently transmitted to their spouses and children. Now there are over 150,000 veterans of that conflict that suffer from chronic illnesses and tens of thousands have died without acknowledgment or proper assistance to keep secret the origin of their illnesses.

The “exposures” in Kuwait and Iraq and the chronic infections picked up by our troops just didn’t “happen” like a flu infection. These men and women were actually “bombed” and “sprayed” with a chemical and biological soup from missiles and sprayers unleashed by Saddam Hussein’s forces. They were also inoculated during their deployment with questionable vaccines. What makes this even more horrific…in the soup of vaccines and environmental exposures were biological agents not created by some mad Iraqi scientist or some rogue ex-Soviet scientist hired by Saddam as part of his “Weapons of Mass Destruction” arsenal.

No. This deadly soup was actually created in the United States by our own scientists; some of whom were trained by the “Operation Paperclip” scientists brought back from Nazi Germany after World War II. And it was tested in our own prisons using unsuspecting prisoners long before the first Gulf War.

Not only did our own scientists create new deadly biological agents, but our own Federal government approved sending these materials directly to Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. We must have known that Saddam would use these weapons against the Iranians. So we created our own Frankenstein monster when we supplied Iraq with the germs almost a decade before the first Gulf War.

The biggest drawback to man’s existence is the proclivity for a monumentally stupid mindset that allows sheer brilliance and compassion to co-exist with a darker side that kills, starts wars, and inflicts unspeakable acts.

Project Day Lily is based on the true story of two scientists in Texas that discovered the presence of one of the most insidious incapacitating biological agents ever developed in Gulf War veterans’ blood. This microbe hides inside cells and causes all sorts of chronic signs and symptoms, similar to what one would see with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia Syndrome, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Multiple Sclerosis and many other chronic illnesses. It also tells the story of the two scientists being thrust into a world of danger and intrigue as they unravel the mystery of how sinister university and government administrators plotted to keep what these scientists had discovered hidden from the American public, even attempting to murder the two whistleblowers to prevent the exposure of their hideous experiments from public scrutiny. The final irony is that the inheritance of one of these scientists was likely used to finance the development and testing of biological weapons of mass destruction by a rogue faction of government scientists, bureaucrats and intelligence operatives, and these same funds likely financed the diabolical campaign of sabotage against the two Texas scientists.

Project Day Lily explains to the general public what happened to the veterans and their family members after the first Gulf War and what is happening to our Armed Forces to this day. Although the book’s narrative ends a few years after the Gulf War, the story continues. Project Day Lily is a wake-up call to America. The book explains why America’s involvement in biological agent development and testing made us less safe and resulted in extremist’s justification for terrorist attacks like September 11, 2001.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2010, 02:12:58 AM by rrrr »
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2010, 02:13:31 AM »
rich, what role did dr lo play in all that (above)?
Logged
richvank

Jr. Member
**
Posts: 44

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2010, 02:31:08 AM »
Hi, rrrr.

I can’t remember all the details now, and will have to review the book when I get back home. It was several years ago when I read it. The names in the book were changed from those of the actual people involved, in order to avoid legal problems, but it is pretty clear who is Dr. Lo in the book. He was at the Armed Forces Institute of Technology at the time, and he did have a patent on the mycoplasma. I think a lot of the work involved was classified, and may still be for all I know. But I do know Garth, and as unbelievable and unlikely sounding as the story in that book is, I believe it’s true, and I found it scary

Rich
« Last Edit: August 21, 2010, 04:37:39 PM by richvank »
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2010, 02:47:58 AM »
can anyone summarize what it is that this conspiracy theory is saying about dr lo? i jsut can’t read the whole thread.

is it that he invented mycoplasma?
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2010, 02:56:21 AM »
and if he is such a bad guy who would want to cover up his past (evil) tracks, why would he research and publish in just the area he’d want to cover up? confused here. someone help me out!
Logged
JT1024

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1706

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #22 on: August 21, 2010, 03:57:06 AM »
Had found information regarding mycoplasma last December. Someone on another forum with FM/CFS, a female with 20 years of service in the US military, was concerned about XMRV and transmitting it to her boyfriend. Her boyfriend was experiencing cardiac problems. When I had done just a tiny bit of research, I had relayed information to her regarding mycoplama. Truly scary. Some of the info is below:

I – PATHOGENIC MYCOPLASMA
A Common Disease Agent Weaponised

There are 200 species of Mycoplasma. Most are innocuous and do no harm; only four or five are pathogenic. Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain) probably comes from the nucleus of the Brucella bacterium. This disease agent is not a bacterium and not a virus; it is a mutated form of the Brucella bacterium, combined with a visna virus, from which the mycoplasma is extracted.

The pathogenic Mycoplasma used to be very innocuous, but biological warfare research conducted between 1942 and the present time has resulted in the creation of more deadly and infectious forms of Mycoplasma. Researchers extracted this mycoplasma from theBrucella bacterium and actually reduced the disease to a crystalline form. They “weaponised” it and tested it on an unsuspecting public in North America.

Dr Maurice Hilleman, chief virologist for the pharmaceutical company Merck Sharp & Dohme, stated that this disease agent is now carried by everybody in North America and possibly most people throughout the world.

Despite reporting flaws, there has clearly been an increased incidence of all the neuro/systemic degenerative diseases since World War II and especially since the 1970s with the arrival of previously unheard-of diseases like chronic fatigue syndrome and AIDS.

According to Dr Shyh-Ching Lo, senior researcher at The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and one of America’s top mycoplasma researchers, this disease agent causes many illnesses including AIDS, cancer, chronic fatigue syndrome, Crohn’s colitis, Type I diabetes, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, Wegener’s disease and collagen-vascular diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and Alzheimer’s.

Dr Charles Engel, who is with the US National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, stated the following at an NIH meeting on February 7, 2000: “I am now of the view that the probable cause of chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia is the mycoplasma…”

I have all the official documents to prove that mycoplasma is the disease agent in chronic fatigue syndrome/fibromyalgia as well as in AIDS, multiple sclerosis and many other illnesses. Of these, 80% are US or Canadian official government documents, and 20% are articles from peer-reviewed journals such as the Journal of the American Medical Association, New England Journal of Medicine and the Canadian Medical Association Journal. The journal articles and government documents complement each other.

http://www.whale.to/m/scott7.html#Blood_Test_

ECG Test

You can also ask your doctor to give you a 24-hour Holter ECG. You know, of course, that an electrocardiogram is a measure of your heartbeat and shows what is going on in the right ventricle, the left ventricle and so on. Tests show that 100% of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia have an irregular heartbeat. At various periods during the 24 hours, the heart, instead of working happily away going “bump-BUMP, bump-BUMP”, every now and again goes “buhbuhbuhbuhbubbuhbuhbuhbuh”. The T-wave (the waves are called P, Q, R, S and T) is normally a peak, and then the wave levels off and starts with the P-wave again. In chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia patients, the T-wave flattens off, or actually inverts. That means the blood in the left ventricle is not being squeezed up through the aorta and around through the body.

So it is not all in your imagination. There is actual physical damage to the heart. The left ventricle muscles do show scarring.That is way many people are diagnosed with a heart condition when they first develop fibromyalgia, but it’s only one of several problems because the mycoplasma can do all kinds of damage.

DISTURBING THOUGHTS

Suspicion by a noted researcher Garth Nicolson, Ph.D. (originally of the M D Anderson Cancer Research Center in Texas and lately of the Institute for Molecular Medicine in Huntington Beach, CA) that the Mycoplasma fermentans incognitus was bioengineered in order to make it more virulent and useful for germ warfare was another revelation I was unable to handle, at first.

Dr. Nicolson explained that he identified an alteration in the molecular structure of the Mycoplasmas he had found in Gulf War Veterans who were ill. The Mycoplasmas were found to have had an envelope gene from an HIV organism inserted into its nucleus (GP 120). This would make the organism more invasive and harder to treat. He explained that this insertion does not occur naturally, but can be “forced” using specialized laboratory techniques. (A mutation caused within a laboratory setting.)

While germ warfare is certainly not a subject that is pleasant or easy to think about, we cannot afford to bury our heads in the sand, either.

Research done by a fellow sufferers, Sean and Leslee Dudley from the Mycoplasma Registry, led me to the possible connection between Mycoplasma and CFIDS. They led me to a researcher by the name of Shyh-Ching Lo. Lo originally filed a patent on Mycoplasma, with the US Patent Office in 1986. His laboratory research has taken him to Texas and to Maryland.

Studies continued until 1996 when four patents were finally granted. The patents involved discovery of two Mycoplasmas with unique morphological and pathobiological properties. It explained that these Mycoplasmas did not appear to be related to any other species of human or animal Mycoplasma. These novel Mycoplasmas were called Mycoplasma penetrans and Mycoplasma fermentans incognitus.

« Last Edit: August 21, 2010, 04:01:04 AM by JT1024 »
Logged
First they Ignore you , then they Laugh at you , then they Attack you , then you WIN!!!

Mahatma Gandhi
awol

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2401

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2010, 06:11:34 AM »
Quote from: Levi on August 21, 2010, 05:53:04 AM

I believe Dr. Lo is a man of conscience, not evil like the demonic minions at CDC. Check out these specifics:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RMNEWS_DAILY_EMAILS/message/22103

My point here is that you will be hard pressed to find a more controversial figure in science than Dr. Lo. The CFS community needs to get in front of that vis-a-vis the PNAS paper. There are at least a couple of weeks to work out the spin on this.

I agree. I don’t read this as Lo creating the frankenstein here. 1986 was his patent, for the “discovery”. He is controversial because everyone who has ever actually looked at biological causes of ME/CFS is controversial, and he has apparently ignored the politics and invested in what likely seemed to many to be a completely outlandish theory.
Logged
Hoping

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1933
I’m A Gamma!

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #24 on: August 21, 2010, 10:59:25 AM »
I would like to know which 32 unsuspecting cities in the US were doused with this stuff.

I tried to find a copy of the 95th Congress, hoping to find the information therein, but have been unable to find it anywhere.

Logged
One day at a time.
JT1024

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1706

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #25 on: August 21, 2010, 04:23:52 PM »
It still blows my mind to see Dr. Lo’s name so prominent. Why was it “the Alter paper” and now the “Alter/Lo” or “Lo/Alter” paper?
Logged
First they Ignore you , then they Laugh at you , then they Attack you , then you WIN!!!

Mahatma Gandhi
Oerganix

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 900

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #26 on: August 21, 2010, 04:24:24 PM »
If you read this whole thread and the links within it, you will probably get a good idea of why the UK has classified ME/CFS information for the next several decades. It probably also contains the reasons the CDC has tried to disappear this illness. In both cases, government involvement in the cause of this and other illnesses.

BTW, mycoplasma has also been described as L-form and as L-form bacteria, an organism that isn’t really bacteria or virus, but drops its cell wall and can become spore-like, living in immune cells and hiding out from antibiotics that could kill it or stop its reproduction. It re-emerges periodically…some research indicates it can tell when “the coast is clear”…thus causing the symptoms to remit and resurge, apparantly without reason.

This is what pulsed, long term antibiotic treatment counters and this forms the basis for the Marshall Protocol and the Roadback antibiotic protocol. I have often wondered if what Marshall saw, sees and has micron-photographed is actually this very same mycoplasma. He calls it L-form or cell wall deficient bacteria.

Notice that Garth Nicholson includes sarcoidosis as one of the diseases that this bioengineered stuff can cause, and that is what Marshall started out with.

Notice also that people who have been successfully treated have used doxycycline or other tetracyclines to treat their illnesses, and that it can take a year or more of treatment. This is because of the ability of the organism to hide out IN your immune system. Notice also that, rather than blood, it prefers to live in LYMPH tissue. Sound familiar? Yeah, the monkeys infected with XMRV didn’t have it in their blood, but it was common in lymph tissue.

ProHealth today has an article on a study that finds the HIV/AIDS virus in semen is different from that found in blood, and mentions that infection by men having sex is the most common route of infection, not via blood.

Some of the links in this thread also show that is has long been known that it takes another virus, ie EBV or herpes virus to “trigger” or activate a resurgence of mycoplasma disease state. But all this info has been discredited or disappeared by government and establishment researchers.

What Lo knows and when he knew are a bit of a mystery. Maybe at this point he has connected the dots and wants to try to fix what has been done to so many people. Or maybe he wants to be in place to throw a monkey wrench into the proceedings.

Once again, in WPI we trust.
Logged
“The concept of mental illness is often a political tool with which society dismisses its inconvenient members.” – Thomas Szasz, psychiatrist

“Every compulsion is put upon writers to become safe, polite, obedient, and sterile.”
-Sinclair Lewis
***********
JT1024

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1706

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2010, 05:26:45 PM »
I don’t see a “conscience” yet in what I’ve read about Dr. Lo.

There is so much still to learn about on the bioterror programs. Dr. Lo is not the only one to have worked on these “projects” and known about it for so long.

Now I see why this whole thing is taking so long. It truly boggles the mind.

Logged
First they Ignore you , then they Laugh at you , then they Attack you , then you WIN!!!

Mahatma Gandhi
awol

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2401

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2010, 05:46:46 PM »
again, Lo patented the mycoplasma DISCOVERY in 1986. That is many many years after these were supposedly developped and set loose. I am not sure he is the creator at all based on what I read.
Logged
awol

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2401

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2010, 05:57:22 PM »
I tried to read, but too long for me. Can you pull out the relevant bits?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2010, 06:10:36 PM by awol »
Logged

Print

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Go Up

especially these paragraphs regarding Lo’s patent on Mycoplasma:

[[[ “Research done by a fellow sufferers, Sean and Leslee Dudley from the Mycoplasma Registry, led me to the possible connection between Mycoplasma and CFIDS. They led me to a researcher by the name of Shyh-Ching Lo. Lo originally filed a patent on Mycoplasma, with the US Patent Office in 1986. His laboratory research has taken him to Texas and to Maryland. Studies continued until 1996 when four patents were finally granted. The patents involved discovery of two Mycoplasmas with unique morphological and pathobiological properties. It explained that these Mycoplasmas did not appear to be related to any other species of human or animal Mycoplasma. These novel Mycoplasmas were called Mycoplasma penetrans and Mycoplasma fermentans incognitus.

The patents further explain that:

“These extraordinary pathogens are capable of causing chronic debilitating diseases and producing a variety of clinical manifestations and suppressing host immune defense mechanisms.”
“Some patients who are infected with M. penetrans or M. fermentans incognitus can possibly be patients who have been diagnosed as having HIV infection, AIDS Related Complex, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Wegener’s Disease, Sarcoidosis, respiratory distress syndrome, Kibuchi’s Disease, and autoimmune diseases such as collagen vascular disease and Lupus and chronic debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer’s Disease.”

HOW DID SHYH-CHING LO KNOW THIS IN 1986? ? ? ? ? ? ?
(Especially since the name Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
had not even been coined until 1988!!!)” ]]]

<< >>

Oerganix:

— Quote from: omerbasket on August 19, 2010, 04:52:14 PM —I have just read a little bit of it…
I don’t understand why they say that mycoplasma causes AIDS. I believe we know today that HIV causes AIDS – don’t we?

Threw the case of ME/CFS I’ve learned that conspiracies aren’t always just theories. But saying that another pathogen is causeing AIDS does sound like a conspiracy theory, and I hope that if the person that wrote it really believe that it is true – that he would find a way to get someone to prove it scientifically and to move things forward. But until than I would continue to think that HIV is the pathogen that causes AIDS…

It doesn’t mean that MYCOPLASMA doesn’t do other things… And by the way – we now know of an institute that if we can convince them that it is important to investigate it, they will do it and find the truth. And that institute is the WPI.

— End quote —

Read the link Levi posted: http://www.duesberg.com/media/ebhiv.html

excerpt: ”
“We do not yet know how HIV causes AIDS,” Dr. John Coffin of Tufts University, a member of the international committee that named the virus, told the delegates to the Sixth International Conference on AIDS last June.
It is that missing link that nags at a growing number of the world’s best-known scientists. They have begun to suggest a frightening explanation: HIV alone may not cause the disease. Or it may have nothing to do with it.”

Some of this article is eerily similar to ME/CFS, especially the part where they say HIV by itself doesn’t cause anything, but with this other artificial thing…neither a virus nor a bacterium, but part of another organism…HIV seems to be activated or completed or triggered….how to describe it?

And the CDCs and NIHs reaction to science they didn’t come up with or want to disappear is very similar to what we’ve experienced with ME/CFS.

lulu:
??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
I do not understand most of this but it sounds really bad and it includes both Coffin and Lo!

Robyn:
Just look this up ” Special Virus Cancer Program” and you will get an eyeful.

I saw this years ago and thought what the heck: Pathogenic Mycoplasma”, US Patent No. 5,242,820, issued September 7, 1993. Dr Lo is listed as the Inventor” and the American Registry of Pathology, Washington, DC, is listed as the “Assignee”.

Many doctors don’t know about this mycoplasma disease agent because it was developed by the US military in biological warfare experimentation and it was not made public. This pathogen was patented by the United States military and Dr Shyh-Ching Lo.

kit:
also interesting from

http://www.shasta.com/cybermom/putting.htm

especially these paragraphs regarding Lo’s patent on Mycoplasma:

[[[ “Research done by a fellow sufferers, Sean and Leslee Dudley from the Mycoplasma Registry, led me to the possible connection between Mycoplasma and CFIDS. They led me to a researcher by the name of Shyh-Ching Lo. Lo originally filed a patent on Mycoplasma, with the US Patent Office in 1986. His laboratory research has taken him to Texas and to Maryland. Studies continued until 1996 when four patents were finally granted. The patents involved discovery of two Mycoplasmas with unique morphological and pathobiological properties. It explained that these Mycoplasmas did not appear to be related to any other species of human or animal Mycoplasma. These novel Mycoplasmas were called Mycoplasma penetrans and Mycoplasma fermentans incognitus.

The patents further explain that:

“These extraordinary pathogens are capable of causing chronic debilitating diseases and producing a variety of clinical manifestations and suppressing host immune defense mechanisms.”
“Some patients who are infected with M. penetrans or M. fermentans incognitus can possibly be patients who have been diagnosed as having HIV infection, AIDS Related Complex, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Wegener’s Disease, Sarcoidosis, respiratory distress syndrome, Kibuchi’s Disease, and autoimmune diseases such as collagen vascular disease and Lupus and chronic debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer’s Disease.”

HOW DID SHYH-CHING LO KNOW THIS IN 1986? ? ? ? ? ? ?
(Especially since the name Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
had not even been coined until 1988!!!)” ]]]

Does anyone know Sharon Briggs, the author of this article, or the SHASTA CFIDS group?

JT1024

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1706

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #30 on: August 21, 2010, 07:35:20 PM »
Levi,

I absolutely read your posts. Perhaps I’ve missed something obvious???

I read about the “key to this equation is a protein factory known as a Hybrid (Bioengineered) Mycoplasm developed at Fort Detrick, MD, USA, under the
direction of Dr. Leonard Hayflick of Stanford University in 1968 which acts as a vector for RNA Viruses.”

There are many people involved and I just haven’t figured out where Dr. Lo fits into the puzzle. He has authored and or worked on many published papers. For whatever reason, he is associated with XMRV now.

If it is something really easy, I guess I just need to spelled out for me. 😦 Can you help me understand??
Logged
First they Ignore you , then they Laugh at you , then they Attack you , then you WIN!!!

Mahatma Gandhi
Eric

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 354

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #31 on: August 21, 2010, 07:35:51 PM »
I’m surprised that people would accuse Dr Lo of stuff without a radical and fundamental case. His having a patent means less than zero, you will find that a large fraction of biologists, maybe most, patent anything big that they discover. This is strongly encouraged by universities and institutes. WPI has a patent on their XMRV work, as I recall.

We all know what its like to be accused of something false.

I’m pretty surprised that RvK whom I have known many a year hints at something about Lo but cannot in fact recall what it is. Not that I am never similarly lackadaisical. I most certainly am… but to my mind this really is something particularly important – accusing someone of stuff – someone who seems to me to be our friend.

Believing that some other pathogen in addition to HIV is essential to AIDS is extremely dferent from HIV denialism, which is simply as untenable on present evidence as anything ever could be. Believe me, Duesberg could very well be distorting whatever he is trying to say on his website. I once read 2/3 of one of his papers, it was literally the worst paper I’ve ever read — in terms of the level of logic, not the hypothesis; I am perfectly willing to weigh strange hypotheses. His street cred, out there on the mean hallways of academe, is absolute zero, and for good reason.

What some source said above is perfectly true: there is no strong evidence for any theory of how HIV infection leads to helper-T cell depletion. At least, this was true three years ago. Therefore, yes, there is some reason to contemplate the possibility that there could be some entity X in the causal chain that is simply not known to date — there is room for any sort of theory, really, if it can hold water. Or HIV could be doing it directly in some way we dont know of. Regardless, we know that HIV is a/the sine qua non of AIDS and that you cannot get it without having HIV.

ETA There’s a large body of dead-serious scientific work on eyewitness testimony being extremely unreliable. Sure, I haven’t scrutinized it, I haven’t read it, but I’ve heard that that’s the consensus in the field. It could be garbage science, which one cannot tell without sitting down and reading it. But it probably isn’t (I’ll say it is 75% likely to be true).

edited by jace – reason, consecutive posts. Please use the modify facility
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 09:10:33 PM by jace »
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #32 on: August 21, 2010, 07:45:11 PM »
i’m reading up on things, too, including levi’s links. this link was especially hard to read, and mentions Lo at the top: who knows if it is true tho…

http://www.policestateplanning.com/prison_experiments.htm
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 02:12:39 AM by rrrr »
Logged
Eric

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 354

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #33 on: August 21, 2010, 07:46:11 PM »
I don’t see any patent filed by Lo before the 90s. I could be searching wrong and getting incomplete results, but as of now I do not believe that he filed any patent containing “chronic fatigue synd” before that name was current. Even if he did, he might have heard of it from someone behind the scenes.

What’s wrong with Lo reading Nicolson and finding the book inconclusive?

Have a look at my patent search, try your own should you like to (it takes a minute to figure the darn thing out):

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=in%2Flo-shyh-ching&d=PTXT

Note, I’m not denying Nicolson was suppressed or semi-suppressed in some sense by the US military, and so on, and so on. It could mostly be true, or not. I’m merely interested in the Lo thing.

edited by jace – reason, consecutive posts. Please use the modify facility
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 09:11:01 PM by jace »
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #34 on: August 21, 2010, 07:51:13 PM »
i edited and cut this post, since i am not sure if what i wrote holds any water and contains any truth.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 02:13:48 AM by rrrr »
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #35 on: August 21, 2010, 07:53:25 PM »
i edited and cut this post, since i am not sure if what i wrote holds any water….
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 02:14:09 AM by rrrr »
Logged
Eric

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 354

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #36 on: August 21, 2010, 07:55:54 PM »
I see things like this one from rrrrrr, but why should I think these web documents are true? What’s the method for validating or falsifying things that are written on the web, since surely it is not all true (much of it is contradictory)?

I wrote to Dr. Nicolson and explained I had found. He replied promptly and made a statement that shocked me. He stated that the modified mycoplasma fernentans incognitus was for some reason found in especially high numbers in Texas Board of Corrections institutions.

Yes, medical experiments have at times been done on inmates. Also on non-inmates (Tuskegee). How much syphilis would you find in a Texas jailhouse in 1930? Same as the rest of the population? Not a chance. SO what if these people really do harbor mycoplasma (which I am not 100% convinced of) – mayeb they have it on account of having XMRV which may be and STD. Believe me, the prev of syph in in USA in 1930 was about 5%, I’ll bet you it was more like 30% in Texas prisons. That’s the way things are.

The three moms told Dr. Nicolson that Dr. Shyh- Ching Lo, who filed the U.S. Army patent on mycoplasma fermentans incognitus, was seen at the prison in Huntsville on several occasions.

Oh come on, no one can tell Chinese people apart, they al look identical. Seriously, you can get three people to say anything, or one person to say anything about what he and two others said, so how do we know they are right?

Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #37 on: August 21, 2010, 08:21:55 PM »
eric wrote: “Oh come on, no one can tell Chinese people apart, they al look identical…”

oooouch. that one hurt. and it is not true. that is like saying all white men look alike.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2010, 08:34:30 PM by rrrr »
Logged
JT1024

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1706

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #38 on: August 21, 2010, 08:27:49 PM »
Levi ,

I was aware of Dr. Lo’s connection with mycoplasma (the patents) but what does that have to do with the NIH/FDA paper and XMRV?
Logged
First they Ignore you , then they Laugh at you , then they Attack you , then you WIN!!!

Mahatma Gandhi
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #39 on: August 21, 2010, 08:33:59 PM »
i edited and cut this post, since i am not sure if what i wrote holds any water….
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 02:15:04 AM by rrrr »
Logged
since

Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1217

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #40 on: August 21, 2010, 08:43:25 PM »
Quote from: rrrr on August 21, 2010, 08:33:59 PM

eric, the connection i see is this:

– a certain type of mycoplasma can create cfs/gulf war illness and other illness, and may be the cause of these illnesses
– lo was involved in creating (or at least patenting) this certain type of mycoplasma
– for reasons that never seemed to add up, for decades the US gov’t has tried to suppress any advancement in CFS research, marginalizing it with studies that aim to discredit it (studies on sexual abuse and psychological disorders, as in last month’s CDC paper)
– when nicolson tried to expose the evidence of mycoplasma (the gov’t making it, and its role in creating all these illnesses) he was attacked, fired, and many other things (as stated in his book, which i have yet to read, but someone who read it already verbally summarized it for me.

p.s. i have had mycoplasma for decades, likely like many of us. it was on one of the first blood tests i did for my “chronic EBV diagnosis.”

it is interesting that the websites i’m looking at say doxy is a cure. 6-12 months of 100 mg 3x per day.

It’s innuendo at this point, and does not explain the 1934 LA outbreak or outbreaks that occurred prior to Dr. Lo becoming a scientist (anyone know how old he is)? He is doing research that is going to help us, I don’t understand the animosity.
Logged
Quality over quantity.
Eric

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 354

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #41 on: August 21, 2010, 08:47:32 PM »
Levi, I don’t know, maybe you have a point about the media and stuff. Could be. But really, I think they feel like they need iron evidence, they need to meet up with Deep Throat at 4;00am to receive the goods. Personally I’m doubting that they will buy Nicolson’s thing but I admit I havent read it.

I mean the WSJ basically explicitly wrote X about the HHS holdup, then HHS issued a statement of non-X. Now that was outrageous and obnoxious, but no one cares except us!

I have to admit I am a little non-plussed though at people intuiting that he’s wicked or something, half-accusing him of a crime against man. But whatever, we all got our opinions and now mine is in the mix. Perhaps I’ll say more at my blog that I may start up.

The media is gonna want to see the home truths before they would talk about this. Where are there any actual source documents on this, is what I wonder. The writings of opinionated people could most certainly be true, but they would have to point to something ascertainable.

I don’t follow 9-11 heterodoxy but I understand there are a lot of engineers etc who are into it. I’m guessing they’re just wrong because they cant imagine that XYZ would actually make the buildings fall, but I’m guessing that’s just the poverty of their imaginations – like those who think there cannot possibly be a physical illness that had no truly stark biomarker (as of 2008). As we know this is merely poverty of imagination, they ought to take a look at quantum mechanics where the truth was beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, and then reconfigure the breadth of their imagination based on such evidence. Anyway, I cannot prove them wrong, they could be correct, but at any rate they refer to external things that I could examine if I had engineering knowledge.

So, I wonder what the source is of your document that says
Quote

Under the Special Virus Cancer Program of the National Institute of Health
and conducted by the National Cancer Institute, Progress Report No. 9, 1972
Call No. HE20.3152, V.81, 972, No. 9

and so on. I mean, is this allegedly a document made by NIH, and if so how can we find out whether it be legitimate. By the way Leonard Hayflick who is cited in there also has a great discovery under his belt.

> oooouch. that one hurt. and it is not true. that is like saying all white men look alike.

Sorry, it was just a joke, I like rough jokes, I love to throw around my 135 pounds in perilous, ultra-masculine games such as frisbee football

and so forth. I like China ancient and modern, I read Chuang-tzu about every year. But such humor probably doesnt have a place here, so I apologize ad take it back.

I can’t really live without being “outrageous”, it’s too late for me now after I’ve read “Mort a credit” which is based on such stuff, I loved that book, I love pungency, zee French esprit including mock ‘malice’, mock ‘hysteria’, the clash of views a la Montaigne. So I’ll probably start this blog soon, and such miscreants as are interested in my views can read me there.

edited by jace – reason, consecutive posts. Please use the modify facility

« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 09:11:36 PM by jace »
Logged
Flo

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 467
Advocate

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #42 on: August 21, 2010, 08:50:39 PM »
Quote from: rrrr on August 21, 2010, 08:21:55 PM

eric wrote: “Oh come on, no one can tell Chinese people apart, they al look identical…”

oooouch. that one hurt. and it is not true. that is like saying all white men look alike.

Eric was not saying that Chinese people all look alike. He was using irony to make his point–people’s reports on what they see are often unreliable; witnesses who point the finger at the wrong person in criminal cases are unreliable; and there was sloppy reporting involved in basing conclusions on what three possibly unreliable people said.
Logged
Eric

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 354

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #43 on: August 21, 2010, 08:57:35 PM »
I wish I was making that point (I can see how it looks that way) – I was actually just being me, but I do retract it, it doesnt really make for a consturctive forum since some don’t like it, understandably. I didn’t think of the eyewitness thing until later. It’s true, though, and my joke actually caused it to come to my mind. I’m sure there are articles about it in, like, Slate, The New Yorker.
Logged
Flo

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 467
Advocate

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #44 on: August 21, 2010, 08:59:25 PM »
So, Levi. Some of us have been reading about this stuff for years, but you have brought up some interesting speculation about Dr. Lo, and we’ll all just have to wait and see–at least until Monday or Tuesday. Maybe he will turn out to be our Walter Gunn.
Logged
Topic: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy (Read 1980 times)
Eric

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 354

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #45 on: August 21, 2010, 09:03:56 PM »
I did actually harm someone for real in frisbee football, I hurled the frisbee right into the bridge of his nose, as hard as i could, point blank. Dude was yowling like heck. A total accident, but you can see why I’m a horrible driver, an unsafe sportsman with only 20 lbs of muscle, and too hopeless in the bio lab to go on with it. Those things are all the same, the sensory world, judgement about the sensory world, remembering what it was you saw in the sensory world like 2 seconds ago. Drive slow, slower and slower by the years, if, like me, you find yourself doing something terrible on the road once a month, by accident.

it is interesting that the websites i’m looking at say doxy is a cure. 6-12 months of 100 mg 3x per day.

But, do you know of the huge lyme contingent, Marshall contingent (whose notions I absolutely disagree with mostly), etc, there are others…. they have doxy coming out their ears for years. I did too, amongst other abx, but most people who take them improve only partially according to their own reports, few truly approach normality. Tons of these people, I would say, have CCC whatever-its-called-now. They (we) take all kinds of stuff, but doxy is the biggest “staple.” And, it’s a broad spectrum drug that can whack the vast majority of bacteria species.

I took 500 mg of doxy a day (divided doses of course) for a decent period of time. As I’ve written here before, I can’t remember if I decided this was safe, or just decided to do it anyway – beware, it might be quite dangers for many of a few people, and I just got lucky (different people can vary considerably in how rapidly they excrete different drugs)! But I did do it, at 135 pounds, something like that, I havent had a scale in many a year. That makes for a hefty concentration of the stuff, since I am so light.

> for reasons that never seemed to add up, for decades the US gov’t has tried to suppress any advancement in CFS research, marginalizing it with studies that aim to discredit it (studies on sexual abuse and psychological disorders, as in last month’s CDC paper)

I think a ton of people have physiological depression and/or anxiety, but there too they mostly apply the psych stuff, the ideas that have never resulted in the cure or even radical improvement in any disease (except maybe specific obsessions in OCD). Those ideas have been applied before to migraine, and so on. People just love to stick it to sick people with these theories – they LOVE it! – that ought to instead be a cause of embarrassment, since they have resulted in so little effective treatment.

I seen my own mudda (who fortunately never doubted me, when many did) think this about an undiagnosable stomach ailment of a girl we knew. Severe anxiety can cause a pretty strong feeling in the pit of the stomach, but I knew her, she had her head together, she would know if it was anxiety, and there can be no doubt that she was asked.

In my view this stickin it to people is just so common.

Quote
Quote

Nickolson’s story is compelling including attempts by biowar terrorist companies on the life of his staff and FBI guards. He was fired from M.D. Anderson Cancer Hospital in Texas. His group is now based in Irvine, CA. He claims that 15% to 20% of the population in Iraq, southern Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Jordan have Gulf War syndrome.

Now that’s interesting, about people in the gulf region, if he really said that. How come we don’t hear about this from the physicians down that way – or are there in fact claims to this effect from them (or from anyone else)?

A far-from-trivial number of Saudis hate, or at minimum totally and passionately object to, the USA for backing the semi-unpopular Saud regime (and in fact I actually think this a semi-valid beef). So why aren’t we hearing about this from any of them? Not that we absolutely necessarily would, but it seems likely.

Blimey, Daylilly is 572 pages! I was gonna buy it so I can blog on it and feel all self-important, but…. well maybe….

Hayflick limit, yes indeed. It may have some importance in theorizing about cancer… people are interested in just how many mutations are usually needed to open the way to a malignant tumor, and how that has to do with the life of a cell (which often gets mutations in the course of cell division), and so on.

THere’s also a bit of a paradox in that blue whales, dinosaurs, have about the same mutation rate as people (well, not the dinosaurs necesarily), and have waaaay more cells than people. A blue whale weighs over 1,000x mroe than a man so it must have a lot more cells, hence a lot (waaay a lot) more chances per year for cells to get mutations in all the wrong places – so why don’t they all come down with cancer ASAP? Various ideas have been put forward.

Lo could potentially be an advocate for us. I can appreciate that some people may not completely trust him, I mean I certainly don’t trust CAA. By his fruits we shall sort-of know him, I guess, if he says anything in the press.

In these economically mgihty messed up times, there may be a rumble, a little mano a mano, about highly pricey treatments.

One place where I recall “rationing” has often been mentioned, is in the treatment of diseases (RA, Crohns, etc) with those super-expensive anti-TNFa biological drugs.

Quote

The latest survey of UK rheumatology units conducted by ARMA & BSR indicates that a significant number of people who meet the strict NICE eligibility criteria for the treatment face persistent problems in accessing it.

Twenty percent of rheumatology units contacted stated that they were unable to prescribe TNF-a inhibitors to every rheumatoid arthritis patient they identified as eligible in accordance with NICE guidance.

Now, some patients don’t even meet these NICE guidelines to begin with. And I strongly suspect that the RA patients who *don’t* meet those guidelines could probably also benefit in they could get it, but that might be false. Anyway it seems clear that they are indeed rationed. There are many many more hits on google.

Just FYI, I’m quite self-interested in saying this of course, because I presently have quite mild CFS on the whole. Yet I still want to take all these fun new adventurous meds and feel even better, natch! – but if rationing there be, I’m gonna be on the wrong side of the cut-off. I have no other conflicts of interest!

edited by jace – reason, consecutive posts. Please use the modify facility
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 09:08:58 PM by jace »
Logged
rrrr

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 336

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #46 on: August 21, 2010, 11:56:16 PM »
Quote from: Flo on August 21, 2010, 08:50:39 PM

Eric was not saying that Chinese people all look alike. He was using irony to make his point–people’s reports on what they see are often unreliable; witnesses who point the finger at the wrong person in criminal cases are unreliable; and there was sloppy reporting involved in basing conclusions on what three possibly unreliable people said.

okay. i get the irony now. i did not earlier. thanks for clarification, eric and everyone.
Logged
Dr. Yes

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1103

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #47 on: August 22, 2010, 04:14:20 AM »
These links claim to quote from many documents, but do not actually provide text from the documents or links to the documents, and rarely verify the sources. The internet is full of this kind of stuff. For every valid ‘conspiracy theory’ there are several kooky ones. I’m not sure where this one falls, but if the degree of scientific fidelity in the linked articles posted here is any indication, I would say it’s definitely kooky. There are repeated mistakes in the science behind the alleged ‘disease agent’:

Quote

“There are 200 species of Mycoplasma. Most are innocuous and do no harm; only four or five are pathogenic. Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain) probably comes from the nucleus of the Brucella bacterium. This disease agent is not a bacterium and not a virus; it is a mutated form of the Brucella bacterium, combined with a visna virus, from which the mycoplasma is extracted.”

That makes no sense; Mycoplasma is a distinct bacterial genera that has no relationship (and certainly cannot be ‘extracted from’) Brucella or any other pathogen.

Quote

“The pathogenic Mycoplasma used to be very innocuous, but biological warfare research conducted between 1942 and the present time has resulted in the creation of more deadly and infectious forms of Mycoplasma. Researchers extracted this mycoplasma from theBrucella bacterium and actually reduced the disease to a crystalline form. They “weaponised” it and tested it on an unsuspecting public in North America.”

Again, mycoplasma does not come from other bacteria!! Whoever wrote this has no idea what they are talking about here, so it is hard to take the rest that they say seriously.

Quote

“According to Dr Shyh-Ching Lo, senior researcher at The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and one of America’s top mycoplasma researchers, this disease agent causes many illnesses including AIDS, cancer, chronic fatigue syndrome, Crohn’s colitis, Type I diabetes, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, Wegener’s disease and collagen-vascular diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and Alzheimer’s.”

Source for this comment alleged to Lo?

Quote

“Because it is only the DNA particle of the bacterium, it doesn’t have any organelles to process its own nutrients, so it grows by uptaking pre-formed sterols from its host cell and it literally kills the cell; the cell ruptures and what is left gets dumped into the bloodstream.”

Again, this is not true; mycoplasma is not merely the DNA particle of a bacterium. It does require host sterols because through evolution as a parasitic organism it has done away with some of its genetic machinery for synthesis.

Quote

“Crystalline Brucella

(…)

They had produced a crystalline bacterial toxin extracted from the Brucella bacterium. The bacterial toxin could be removed in crystalline form and stored, transported and deployed without deteriorating. It could be delivered by other vectors such as insects, aerosol or the food chain (in nature it is delivered within the bacterium). But the factor that is working in the Brucella is the mycoplasma.

Brucella is a disease agent that doesn’t kill people; it disables them. But, according to Dr Donald MacArthur of the Pentagon, appearing before a congressional committee in 1969,(4) researchers found that if they had mycoplasma at a certain strength—actually, 10 to the 10th power—it would develop into AIDS, and the person would die from it within a reasonable period of time because it could bypass the natural human defences. If the strength was 10 to 8, the person would manifest with chronic fatigue syndrome or fibromyalgia. If it was l0 to 7, they would present as wasting; they wouldn’t die and they wouldn’t be disabled, but they would not be very interested in life; they would waste away.

Most of us have never heard of the disease brucellosis because it largely disappeared when they began pasteurising milk, which was the carrier. One salt shaker of the pure disease agent in a crystalline form could sicken the entire population of Canada. It is absolutely deadly, not so much in terms of killing the body but disabling it. Because the crystalline disease agent goes into solution in the blood, ordinary blood and tissue tests will not reveal its presence. The mycoplasma will only crystallise at 8.1 pH, and the blood has a pH of 7.4 pH. So the doctor thinks your complaint is “all in your head”.”

Not one bit of the above makes any sense. Again the assertion about mycoplasma being somehow a component of Brucella, which is wrong. The crystallized agent they are talking about it brucella toxin, which is simply an organotoxin. It can’t replicate/ grow/ whatever. What that has to do with mycoplasma at all is utterly unclear here. The pH stuff is especially bizarre.

Quote

“The AIDS pathogen was created out of a Brucella bacterium mutated with a visna virus; then the toxin was removed as a DNA particle called a mycoplasma.”

Quite a statement, and absolutely no evidence. And, again, MYCOPLASMA IS NOT A DNA PARTICLE! If they are quoting from official sources, why do they keep butchering the science??

Quote

“This mycoplasma couldn’t be detected until about 30 years ago when the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was developed, in which a sample of your blood is examined and damaged particles are removed and subjected to a polymerase chain reaction. This causes the DNA in the particles to break down. The particles are then placed in a nutrient, which causes the DNA to grow back into its original form. If enough of the substance is produced, the form can be recognised, so it can be determined whether Brucella or another kind of agent is behind that particular mycoplasma.”

Again, whoever wrote this is utterly confused, not only about Mycoplasma but about PCR and, well, everything.

According to the article in the second Aegis link, Lo discovered M. incognitus in HIV patients and brought it to the attention of the scientific community. I don’t know the follow-up to this story, but it does seem odd that he would do so if he ‘created’ it…

The following link:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RMNEWS_DAILY_EMAILS/message/22103

again refers to an official document without actually quoting from it, and includes inaccuracies like the following:

Quote

“The HYBRID lipid-ether bonds present in the Mycoplasm’s membrane give it heat resistance (112 degrees Fahrenheit)and acid resistance to enzymes of White Blood Cells”

The enzymes in white blood cells used to kill pathogens do not employ ‘acid’.

Quote

“I believe all your questions will be sufficiently answered once you
understand the mycoplasm vector. In sum, you can now deliver any RNA Viral Sequence whether its Cholera, Dyptheria, Sleeping Sickness, Malaria etc. in the vector of a mycoplasm which the body cannot kill. You will not test positive for the RNA Viral Sequence because there is no outer protein coat to trigger antibodies. Hence the high rates of these diseases in Africa while people test negative.”

None of the diseases in bold are “RNA Viral Sequences”. They last two in fact are protozoans with complex DNA compared to a virus or even a bacteria.

A medical/scientific conspiracy theory better have its medical science straight, and this one does not, from what has been posted here. It also needs real documentation, not just synopses of what a given person claims to have read in certain documents. Unless folks are willing to dig up the official source documents (such as the “Special Virus Cancer Program Progress Reports”, which the above source says he would “like to post on line”), it’s WAY over the top to start going after Lo on the basis of these highly questionable allegations. Even if one feels the need to discuss them, one shouldn’t accept them at face value. Instead, their claims must be subjected to at least the same level of critical scrutiny one would a random blog or publication making claims about CFS.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 04:16:26 AM by Dr. Yes »
Logged
-“Remember what the doctor said?”

-“Of course: Grandpa Seth is an invention of my subconscious.”
JT1024

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1706

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #48 on: August 22, 2010, 04:40:08 AM »
Thank you Dr. Yes for having the clear mind to put things in perspective!

I still would like to know more about Dr. Lo though!

It seems odd that his name reappeared with the impending publication in PNAS.

Logged
First they Ignore you , then they Laugh at you , then they Attack you , then you WIN!!!

Mahatma Gandhi
xrayspex

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 392

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #49 on: August 22, 2010, 08:29:52 AM »
Interesting thread like the one on it at PR too.
many thoughts….a few:
-hey Eric, you say you have “mild” cfs do you think it could be partly cus you took some doxy at times?
because in that antidote/ propaganda about doxy it does say I think, or elsewhere in all this, that one would have to take the doxy more at the onset of cfs for it to work, so that could explain its failure for many; the timing so perhaps doesnt rule it out then as useful.

I had recurring mono as teen young adult about 10 years prior to the onset of chronic whatevah I have now, I did take tetracyline in late high school for complexion, perhaps that helped knock some stuff back a lot when young at the right time and could explain why I have a moderate cfs case (its hard for me to rate self on continuum).

-at first I was all over this Lo info, but now its dawning on me are we being fed this for a reason, playing right into something by getting critical of him. but nothing would surprise me either way, its all wild enough any thing could be true. but we should be careful before jump to negative conclusions I appreciate the call for balance.

-I forgot who just posted about RA treatment but its interesting to me reading this stuff about mycoplasma and those mothers w/the prison stuff etc in that a good friend of mine just got RA and she asked for the methotrexate and is being given it, its been hard on her like chemo but its getting easier and she feels its helping her. It blows me away I have this cfs/fm crap 20 years and in a couple months she gets dx w/RA and prescription for chemo all in the same year of onset. However, reading that moms thing about the prison experiments and her kid being sick, she made the point that steroids and immune suppressants etc werent what he needed and thats what they wanted to give her kid with juv ra, that doesnt get rid of it but abx would cus of the mycoplasma I think she said. So I wonder if my friend taking this immunosuppresant methotrexate for RA is a good idea or not, but it is interesting she is being taken seriously even if wrong treatment.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 08:32:23 AM by xrayspex »
Logged
Dr. Yes

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1103

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #50 on: August 22, 2010, 09:41:07 AM »
Hi Levi,

Quote from: Levi on August 22, 2010, 06:43:14 AM

Dr. Yes,

Thanks for your comments. No one here is saying there is a factual basis for any of these speculative links or discussions.

Actually, that is exactly what some people were clearly saying, and were concerned about.

Quote

There is just a mountain of internet weirdity surrounding Dr. Lo, and I am wondering how that is going to affect the slated release of the upcoming PNAS paper in terms of reactions from both the media and the public.

I do not think it will affect the PNAS paper negatively at all. The detractors of the Alter/Lo paper will look ridiculous quoting shoddy conspiracy theories, a term which they themselves have accused others of using against them (even though some of those are probably true!). The only way it will even become an issue is if we bring it up, which is of course what you are doing!

Quote

You yourself admit these internet accounts and sources exist.

The accounts exist on the internet, but neither you nor I know any more than that. Some of the sources are claimed to exist, but I have not seen them reproduced yet. If it is your intention to prevent negative spin against a positive XMRV study, then it seems you are going about it absolutely the wrong way! Personally, I would prefer to see what this study says, and how it can help us, before I even think about digging up dirt on one of its authors. Isn’t that the rational strategy??

Quote

Some of it is probably true (such as the spelling of his name), other stuff is probably wrong (plasmids are not viruses). We should probably sort out some of this info ahead of the release of the PNAS article.

Again – why? The ‘establishment types’ either don’t know about this stuff or don’t want it to get out, I would assume. The only thing that could come out of digging this up now is an internet rumor that may cast aspersion on one of the authors of a long-awaited (hopefully positive) replication study. Unless you are of the belief that Dr. Lo is actually secretly trying to sabotage XMRV research in the guise of contributing to a positive XMRV study, there is no logical reason to investigate these allegations at this time.

Quote

Oh, and I noticed that this except was in Dr. Lo’s patent that Eric noted above, did anybody actually read it?

I didn’t see a link to the patent itself, only descriptions of it, including that passage you re-quoted. If you have the link, please PM it to me. But see below for my thoughts on discussing this publicly at this time:

Quote

It would be nice to know for instance, if Dr. Lo ever really worked at the U.S. Army facility at Fort Detrick? Was this truly a former bioweapons facility? When did he work there? My understanding is that U.S. Bioweapons program was terminated in 1969 under Nixon, and Fort Detrick then became an infectious disease facility. So, did Dr. Lo ever do bioweapons research? Did he ever experiment on soldiers or prisoners? Without any coercion or without their permission? Better to have the facts sorted out in advance.

Not in public, not right now. Not unless you want to risk creating a counter-controversy that would, if anything, provide some unnecessary interference surrounding the Alter/Lo paper’s publicity. Timing is everything. If you want to pursue this angle further, I would strongly recommend waiting til Lo is not so important to us. If you want to collect information on him in case he turns out to be some sort of devious saboteur, then it would be best to research behind the scenes for now, not on a (relatively) public forum.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 10:25:05 AM by Dr. Yes »
Logged
-“Remember what the doctor said?”

-“Of course: Grandpa Seth is an invention of my subconscious.”
jace

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4090
Jane Clout
peoplewithME

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #51 on: August 22, 2010, 10:56:06 AM »
Dr Yes speaks wise words. Hear him.
Logged
IinME All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. MEactionUK
awol

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2401

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #52 on: August 22, 2010, 04:18:22 PM »
I actually think it should not be deleted. The discussion on what should and should not be discussed and how in “public” threads is worth having. Meanwhile, the thread is no longer public. Only accessible to members. So….leave it up!
Logged
lulu

Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1873
You diabolical mastermind, you!

Re: Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2010, 03:37:15 AM »
Dr. Yes, Thank you very much for taking the time to go through all of this and set me straight- very kind of you to do so and I really appreciate it. 😉 I really had no idea what to make of all this earlier.

I freaked out when I read this the other day and began going through scientific articles searching for information about Mycoplasma and Dr. Lo.

Now mind you, I don’t have a scientific background and terrible brain fog and usually can’t remember any article I’ve read 5 minutes afterward, even if I understood it in the first place, which I usually don’t. Still, I thought I might find clues of Dr. Lo lurking about in the scientific journals of academe.

The earliest publication I could find was in 1978 (Control of globin gene expression by steroid hormones in differentiating friend leukemia cells) when he was at the University of Wisconsin. By 1980, he was at the Department of Infectious and Parasitic Disease Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, researching Mycoplasms. He patented Mycoplasma Incognitus/penetrans because he discovered it – and he published his discovery in 1990, (A newly identified human Mycoplasma disease). He seems to have been researching its behavior ever since, particularly with respect to AIDS. A fairly recent paper is Mycoplasma penetrans infections and seroconversion in patients with AIDS: identification of major mycoplasmal antigens targeted by host antibody response. I have a copy if anyone is interested.

About homelessholocaust

Tijuana Hobo , Hebrew Hobo Railroad Rabbi, The Truth Teller Tell True Truth Truthfully. If the Truth is Repugnant to you, You are a Reagan Cultist. Ronald Reagan was Taught by L. Ron Hubbard, Reagan & Hubbard FOUNDED THE SCIENCE FICTION MIND FUCKING GAME- SCIENTOLOGY- then REAGAN USED NERO LINGUIST PROGRAMMING as PRESIDENT to MURDER THE MINDS of AMERICANS!
This entry was posted in NAZI AMERICA. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy

  1. Reblogged this on The Other Side Of The Stretcher and commented:
    Dr. Lo – No stranger to controversy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s