1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
August 8th - What is the one thing about suffering with severe ME that the world needs to know?
Andrew Gladman brings our coverage of the Understanding & Remembrance Day for Severe ME, airing the voice of patients ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Any news on Lipkin study?

Discussion in 'Media, Interviews, Blogs, Talks, Events about XMRV' started by Bevbh, Apr 27, 2012.

  1. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,532
    Likes:
    2,016
    Sofa, UK
    Peterson did say quite confidently at InvestInME Conference that the study results will be released (I think he said study published) on June 30. That has since been questioned by one source, but most other sources seem to still be saying it's expected this month.
     
  2. Sushi

    Sushi Moderator and Senior Member Albuquerque

    Messages:
    7,265
    Likes:
    6,323
    Albuquerque
    Didn't Lipkin himself say that this had been a projected date and that is wasn't going to happen? Saw a letter from him somewhere--maybe Facebook?

    Sushi
     
  3. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,532
    Likes:
    2,016
    Sofa, UK
    Didn't see that from Lipkin, Sushi, I saw it from an indirect source. If anybody has confirmation of Lipkin saying this, I'd be interested to see the link for that.
     
  4. beaker

    beaker CFS/ME 1986

    Messages:
    430
    Likes:
    661
    USA
  5. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,532
    Likes:
    2,016
    Sofa, UK
    Thanks beaker.

    I think Dr Peterson stated at IiME that the study itself had been completed and was now being written up/published. I guess "the work" referred to in the quote above could be that process...but if that Facebook post was on June 4, it's after IiME so I guess it's effectively a response to that, implying that publication date isn't certain.

    I find it surprising if Dr Peterson said what he did (with a definite statement on the publication date) without having had confirmation from those involved in the study that publication would be on June 30...and confirmation that it was OK to say so. But that seems to be the case from the Facebook quote (assuming that quote is accurate/reliable). I would be even more surprised if the June 30 date was not at least a reasonably accurate estimate; it would be a bit disappointing if Dr Peterson gave us inaccurate information on this.
     
  6. Sushi

    Sushi Moderator and Senior Member Albuquerque

    Messages:
    7,265
    Likes:
    6,323
    Albuquerque
    Hi Mark,

    I'm pretty sure I saw a full letter from Dr. Lipkin but I can't be sure of the date or where I saw it. Facebook doesn't seem to be searchable (if that is where I saw it) and it doesn't appear on his page.

    Sushi
     
  7. ukxmrv

    ukxmrv Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes:
    2,071
    London
    There was another Tweet about this

    Jenny Spotila asked "it was reported at the CFASC meeting that the XMRV results will be published as a white paper in a few weeks. Can you confirm?"

    Response from CII722 "Another false rumour. XMRV paper will be peer reviewed. Will announce on twitter when it is submitted/accepted/published".

    (The Center for Infection & Immunity is dedicated to pathogen surveillance & grasping how gene-environment-timing interactions contribute to health & disease. New York City · http://cii.columbia.edu )
     
  8. SOC

    SOC Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,364
    Likes:
    6,445
    USA
    Odd how people who ought to know (Dr Petersen, CFSAC) are so very mistaken about when the results are to be published. Seems like we have major communication breakdown not just researchers to patients, but among the people involved in the project itself. Wonder why.
     
  9. beaker

    beaker CFS/ME 1986

    Messages:
    430
    Likes:
    661
    USA
    A complete conjecture on my part : Is it possible that it is b/c Peterson is supplying samples/patients and is not involved in the lab work and analysis that he is not in sync w/ the lab folk, and therefore the final paper touchups ?
     
  10. SOC

    SOC Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,364
    Likes:
    6,445
    USA
    Could certainly be, but in my experience people in that position tend to be very careful about announcing anything about the research. Still, there are always mix-ups.
     
  11. jspotila

    jspotila Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,074
    Likes:
    609
  12. Daffodil

    Daffodil Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,923
    Likes:
    895
    if they found something, wouldn't it have been leaked? do all the people involved really keep everything to themselves 100% of the time? maybe they do, i don't know.
     
  13. floydguy

    floydguy Senior Member

    Messages:
    650
    Likes:
    238
    I am wondering why people are so shocked that the time line has slipped ? I also was informed by someone involved in the project that it would be late June a preliminary report would be ready. I took this as a goal, not as something written in stone. I certainly look forward to what the conclusions are but if people have to know in advance to the minute that it will be released, you are most likely setting yourself up for a major disappointment. Personally, I appreciate the effort to be informative.
     
  14. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,844
    Likes:
    12,371
    South of England
    The dates for these types of things are always fluid.
    Peterson seems to have announced a provisional date, which obviously wasn't fixed in stone.
    The CII has now said is will be published soon-ish.
    The official at the CFSAC said it would be a white paper first, and then published as a peer reviewed article afterwards.
    Maybe that was a plan at one time, but maybe they've changed their mind about that, hence the changing dates.

    So I don't think we should expect any fixed plans or dates.

    The CII stated:
    "Hopefully the publication ... will be released relatively soon... That's all we can say 4 now."
    https://twitter.com/CII722/status/209802473672675329
     
  15. SOC

    SOC Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,364
    Likes:
    6,445
    USA
    Agreed, dates are always fluid with this kind of thing. What surprises me are the mis-timed announcements by people who ought to know. Researchers are routinely, even habitually, close-mouthed pre-publication, including about deadlines.

    That said, some of our researchers know how desperate we are for any kind of information. That might unconsciously influence them to be more talkative than they would ordinarily be.
     
    jspotila likes this.
  16. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,844
    Likes:
    12,371
    South of England
    And, I think we've all guessed what the outcome is going to be anyway, haven't we?
     
  17. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,532
    Likes:
    2,016
    Sofa, UK
    Your question in that article is (j)spot on:

    That's exactly what's puzzling me about all this. Something has gone very wrong in the communication somewhere along the line. It seems to me that there's a suggestion in the way this latest communication has unfolded that somebody near to the heart of all this must be providing unreliable information to people who trust them implicitly - or that somebody is intervening to change the public communications in ways that are still unexpected to those involved.

    Oddities like this have characterised the XMRV story since the beginning, in every quarter that has touched on the subject, which has only fuelled the controversy - and by the way, these problems aren't solved by trying to retreat and stay tight-lipped about everything, quite the reverse: it seems to me that what is needed is more accurate, authoritative, consistent, transparent communication, throughout the process. Keeping things under wraps just fuels suspicion, paranoia, and conspiracy theories.
     
    jspotila likes this.
  18. floydguy

    floydguy Senior Member

    Messages:
    650
    Likes:
    238
    One lesson I've learned from all of this is that even esteemed researchers can be somewhat sloppy in their communications; both from a scientific/research perspective and normal communication. I love a good conspiracy theory but I don't see one here - yet anyway :)
     
  19. jspotila

    jspotila Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,074
    Likes:
    609
    I agree that it's too early to cry conspiracy theory. It is much more likely to be the result of miscommunication. BUT as Mark noted, given how sensitive communications re: XMRV have been from the beginning I had hoped for a bit more cohesiveness in communications.
     
    SOC likes this.
  20. Daffodil

    Daffodil Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,923
    Likes:
    895
    well i know we have something that replicates via mitosis - whatever it is - and that its likely a retrovirus...cuz azt brought up my nk cell function a lot...and azt acts on dividing cells, which is why it was considered for cancer. azt doesn't help with herpes viruses and some papers say it makes them worse.

    we must continue to fight, no matter what this paper says!
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page