IMO the two slides bit is very, very serious. Despite the rudeness of the ERV blogger, this issue should be looked into. The gist of it as I read the information is that the same exact band read-out graphic was presented as if it were from two separate tests, and there was evidence they thought of using it for a third test! But on closer inspection, it is the result of only one test, the original protein expression part of the Science article. The reason it looked like a second test was that part of the procedure, the use of 5-Azacytidine to force protein expression, had been OMITTED from the original Science article. This is explained here: http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/10/xmrv-researcher-fired.html This would make me hopping mad if I were one of the researchers who spend money trying to validate the original WPI experiment, they left out part of their experimental procedure! I don't know the details of how that omission might have handicapped the other researchers, but suspect we will hear more about this. FWIW, we had language like ERV uses being leveled against ME/CFS patients, anonymous posters and moderators here on PR two years ago when there was a split in forums. I have received PMs from angry forum members far worse than anything on the ERV blog. So I don't think anyone owns the high ground about what language is acceptable in public. The ME/CFS bloggers have been equally potty-mouthed. Personally, I would fire ERV in a moment if she worked for my lab and wrote like that, and think anyone doing that is attempting character assassination and defamation and should be kicked off any rational forum. Low-class all around, regardless whether that is on ERV's blog, on another ME/CFS forum, here or anywhere on the web.