Jump to content


PCR testing on people without cancer?

  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 rcase13


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 16 January 2016 - 08:52 AM

We talk a lot about PCR testing and the body's ability to control CML at very low levels without the use of TKIs.

Has there ever been a study done on normal cancer free people to see what PCR levels the general population has? How many people are walking around with measurable PCR levels with immune systems keeping it in check?

10/01/2014 100% Diagnosis (WBC 278k, Blasts 6%, Spleen extended 20cm)

01/02/2015 0.06% Tasigna 600mg
04/08/2015 0.01% Tasigna 600mg
07/01/2015 0.01% Tasigna 600mg
10/05/2015 0.02% Tasigna 600mg
01/04/2016 0.01% Tasigna 600mg
04/04/2016 PCRU Tasigna 600mg
07/18/2016 PCRU Tasigna 600mg
10/12/2016 PCRU Tasigna 600mg
01/09/2017 PCRU Tasigna 600mg
04/12/2017 PCRU Tasigna 600mg
10/16/2017 PCRU Tasigna 600mg
01/15/2018 PCRU Tasigna 600mg


Cancer Sucks!

#2 Trey


    Advanced Member

  • PS Beta Group
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, Texas

Posted 16 January 2016 - 11:06 AM

There have been three studies on healthy general population bcr-abl positive PCR testing that I am aware of.  Their results vary widely.  One in 2011 said they had 50% positive in healthy individuals.  That alone should tell the story -- the methods are highly suspect. 


The problem here is they took the PCR beyond its range of acceptable detection.  We all know that our PCR results are truncated at 4.0 log or 4.5 log, and rarely 5.0 log.  That is done for a good reason, which is to avoid false positives, and even 5.0 log is suspect.  But the healthy individual studies went to about 7.0 log where errors more often result. 


Just using logic alone, it is not possible that 50% of the population is walking around with detectable levels of BCR-ABL, which can only result from a very large number of PH+ translocated t(9;22) cells in the body.  And these studies even found BCR-ABL in cord blood, which is ridiculous.  It also found that 50% had the P190 e1a2 form of translocation instead of the regular P210 b2a2/b3a2 form, which does not pass the logic test.  And of the three studies, their results varied widely, from 16% to 50 of the general population, which also tells the story that their results are bogus. 


These studies proved only one thing, which is what we already know -- taking the PCR to levels it is not intended to detect results in false positives. 

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users