Todos Med Ltd (TOMDF)

[arpemd]

Thanks for the link, Sword!

hmmm, Not shure how what I'm going to say relates to Todos and Tollovid, but....I think there is a VERY different way to look at this picture than the one presented by BBC. Let's start here:

https://www.science.org/content/article/viral-fossils-our-dna-may-help-us-fight-infection#:~:text=You%20are%20up%20to%208,protecting%20us%20from%20other%20viruses.

"You are up to 8% virus, at least as far as your genome is concerned. Up to 100,000 pieces of ancient viral DNA live among our genes, yet their function—if any—has long been unclear. A new study suggests that some of this foreign genetic material may boost our immune systems, even protecting us from other viruses."

And the headline also does a disservice in stating "EBV CAUSES MS", whereas the original article says "high prevalence and association" (doesn't use the word "cause")

And then do the math.....10 million peeps, of which a mere 5% tested EBV negative, so, a rounding error to 9.5 million positive EBV of which about 1000 end up getting MS. That works out to 1/10,000 people who get EBV end up developing MS. Would you accept a statement that "EBV causes MS" if 9, 999 people did NOT get MS despite getting the EBV virus??

There is something called the "Number Needed to Treat", the NNT, which helps determine the risk/reward ratio of a drug intervention that would positively change an outcome. Obviously, the lower the NNT, the better the intervention: https://patient.info/doctor/numbers-needed-to-treat#:~:text=NNTs%20are%20always%20rounded%20up,%3D%201%2FARR%20%3D%2010.

So, my question, based on my math (please check to see if I screwed up, lol!) and NNT, is that the headline is proposing we treat 9, 999 people in an effort to prevent ONE case of MS...... uhhh !!!! I don't think so.

Obviously, EBV has SOMETHING to do with MS, but also, just as obvious, considering the ubiquity of EBV and the rarity of MS, something else is going on. But the headline and even some of the quotes from scientists suggest that we/they are still stuck in the one bug, one disease paradigm when reality says multiple factors are at work.

My view is that this IS a breakthru at understanding ONE important factor in the creation of MS. But rather than go try to "kill", "fight", "destroy" the ubiquitous bug ending up with a preposterous NNT (and probably all kinds of side effects from the intervention attempted), I'd say we need to find OTHER commonalities as well in the peeps that develop MS along with the finding of common EBV.......