Thursday, May 13, 2010

CFS and XMRV Featured Again in Science Magazine

The May 14, 2010 issue of Science includes five articles that relate to the original XMRV paper published in Science in October 2009.  Each of these is comments submitted by various medical professionals/researchers regarding the original study; authors were given a chance to update their comments before publication this month.

These are all available in full online for now, but may not be available for long:
I read all of this, except for the support material (the first 4 items are pretty short) and found it informative.  Bottom line is that the original study seems quite rigorous and there have not yet been any true replication studies, using the exact methods used by WPI, the National Cancer Institute, and the Cleveland Clinic in their original XMRV study.


Dusty Bogwrangler said...

Thanks for this summary. I'm always grateful for it as I find it difficult to assimilate this sort of information these days. It would be good, wouldn't it, if somebody could get around to replicating the WPI study?

Thanks again for posting this when you have your hands full yourself.

Shelli said...

That's what I took from it, too. I think that the big study from the CDC and WPI etc. should be the most informative. Wish they'd get a move on it,though!

Anonymous said...

Thanks for posting!


Mark said...

This should put to rest any malicious rumors about the quality of the original research and give the lie to the idea that the 3 subsequent negative studies used the same methods as this study.

Mark Elliott

Dominique said...

I read today (I forgot where) that some don't want to replicate the study with WPI test samples because they feel the are contaminated or might be contaminated?

I agree with Jo. Thank you for the summary. I get lost in the medical terminology. I have to re-read it dozens of times and I'm still not sure I get it.