Its been all a bit doom and gloom recently following the IC study release and no concrete news of further proper replication studies being published in the near future. All very understandable. But I recall discussions following the WPI release of the dangers of failure to replicate their findings and the need to make sure any virologists working on XMRV are aware of the politics, diagnostic criteria, the importance of following protocols and the potential for vague CFS classifications to hinder proper research. I also recall more than an element of doubt that the advocacy groups were prepared and capable of policing further research to ensure that it is reliable and unbiased. The IC study publication, the WPI response and the continuing debate, via comments on the Plos, Science, New Scientist etc websites have had the effect of bringing all these things out into the open. No virologist studying XMRV can now be unaware of the issues or of the exact protocol followed by WPI. Not only that, but they are also now aware of how easy it is to get a negative result. I'd be happier now if further studies are now a little delayed while the researchers digest this information and take the greatest care posssible to avoid the 'mistakes' made by the IC team. Hats off to Imperial College.