Jonathan Edwards
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
If we accept a comparison to something like a "ongoing sickness response", then I see no reason to also not see a similarity to the PVF that EBV causes in many people, but why is EBV particularly good at doing that?
The immune response to EBV is quite different from and more prolonged than that for most infections. It involves a 'civil war' between activated B cells and cytotoxic T cells. The virus infects B cells and threatens to produce a generalised quasi-neoplastic polyclonal proliferation. It takes cytotoxic cells recognising EBV a while to expand and bring the infected B cell pool under control.
For most viruses the febrile period with major viraemia lasts no more than a few days. The febrile response in EBV infection can last a month. Immune cell expansion is sufficient to produce splenomegaly in a proportion. So the propensity to produce a protracted sickness response is not very surprising.
The link to MS is probably different in that the risk of MS continues long term, it seems, and is not directly linked to the infection period. That to me suggests that the quasi-neoplastic proliferative state of B cells remains a subclinical state that allows otherwise forbidden B cell clones to expand during future immune responses.