August 8th, 2016: Understanding and Remembrance Day for Severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
Jody Smith joins with other ME voices in honor of Understanding and Remembrance Day for Severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Suzanne Vernon's take on CROI

Discussion in 'XMRV Research and Replication Studies' started by SpecialK82, Mar 5, 2011.

  1. SpecialK82

    SpecialK82 Ohio, USA

    Messages:
    992
    Likes:
    819
    Ohio, USA
    http://www.cfids.org/xmrv/croi-2011-summary.asp


    "The list of important outstanding issues grew longer, rather than shorter, after hearing these presentations. Even though the evidence indicates XMRV evolved in a lab, that doesnt imply that its current existence is benign."
     
  2. Grape Funk

    Grape Funk Senior Member

    Messages:
    113
    Likes:
    1
    USA
    How do you trust a person that has significant association to the CDC for 17 years? Simply, You Don't. Good or bad.
     
  3. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    I know the CDC is a red flag but this is how I assess someone. - I look at their record. I look at the studies they took part in the past and those they taking part in now. On that balance I absolutely trust Suzanne Vernon to look for the pathophysiological causes of this disease. That's what she did when she was at the CDC and that's what she's doing at the CAA.

    If you want to say "oh, Suzanne vernon worked at the CDC and that means she's bad - without looking at her papers or her work at the CAA - then that's your perogative for sure. That's how Dr. Deckoff Jones assesses her - so if she can do that you certainly can as well! But I think a deeper look will more accurately allow us to assess who to support and who not to support. :)

    I certainly do understand the worries about the CDC but I think if you do care to look at her record you'll be surprised and really pretty happy that you don't have Dr. Vernon to worry about...there are plenty of other issues to focus on.
     
  4. wciarci

    wciarci Wenderella

    Messages:
    264
    Likes:
    4
    Connecticut
    Well said Cort, I don't buy into guilt by association.
     
  5. Grape Funk

    Grape Funk Senior Member

    Messages:
    113
    Likes:
    1
    USA
    I can see your rational Cort and very valid points, but seemingly guilty by association as wciarci stated is not what i meant. If i were to be more explicit in my explanation, you judge a man by his behavior in his space and time, not by his word. This can apply to almost anything in the world. Actions speak, hence i look at what has been done since she has stepped in, and what contribution has been made. The tenure of her being at the CDC does not help either. I am very skeptical of all people within that association, just like i am of The Bush Administration, as many others would agree. If someone is part of a regime, essentially, they should take ample note of what is going on at their corporation. Especially if you are involved in Infectious D. department at the prime of CFIDS unraveling. Smells a little funky when taking in other historical facts we all know involving us.

    I have read her record, and once again, I'm looking at what has been done since commencement at the CAA in 2007
     
  6. wciarci

    wciarci Wenderella

    Messages:
    264
    Likes:
    4
    Connecticut
    Grape funk, didn't mean to offend you. I was just making a quick opinion. I am too tired to judge anyone right now and prefer to wait and see, think positively until proven otherwise. It is the only way I can get by, day to day.

    WEndy
     
  7. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    I know she bears a heavy burden of proof by being at the CDC for so long. Just looking at it she would seem to be a horrible choice to lead up the CAA's research program.

    Reeves really controlled that program. I tried to get in touch with her while she was at the CDC and she replied in a very nice note that she would love to talk but that Dr. Reeves wouldn't let anyone there talk to anyone else. Later she said they referred to him in the program as 'the Dictator" :).

    (I was actually able to get a conversation with another researcher there going for a short time and he too, said - never mention my name! He was a nice guy and was not all in the "CFS is psychology branch". I don't think he's with them anymore)

    When she came out of the CDC and headed over to the CAA she said her first instinct was to have all the CAA studies be on pathogens. (Her background is, after all, in viruses). That didn't happen but they are (or have recently) funded studies on endogenous retroviruses, XMRV, EBV and gut bacteria.

    There is the perception of the CDC as devoted to a psychological interpretation of CFS and that has been a strong focus lately but its looked at quite a few different areas of CFS over time and she has never been involved in the psych studies at all. The CDC has also been focused on the stress response and she has been involved in those studies and I imagine she thinks it plays a role - although in one article she said she thought it played a secondary role. Since she left the CDC immune aspects of CFS have been a major focus for her.

    I don't think you're going to agree with everything she's done and I'm imagine you might disagree strongly with a few things she's done - this is after all a really complex field with lots of controversial topics - but in general I really don't think you have to worry about her. THe CAA research program does not look like the CDC research program at all.
     
  8. Grape Funk

    Grape Funk Senior Member

    Messages:
    113
    Likes:
    1
    USA
    Ah Wendy it is fine i was just illustrating my point. I did not take any initial offense at all. I agree, it's hard to be an optimist under oppression
     
  9. SpecialK82

    SpecialK82 Ohio, USA

    Messages:
    992
    Likes:
    819
    Ohio, USA
    Cort thank you for your inside knowledge of the CDC operations under Reeves, he sounds like he oppressed his staff, and so it very difficult to judge the people around him when they could not act on their own. Regardless of how it was at the CDC though, I can't imagine why Suzanne would want to work full-time for an illness advocacy organization that she does not believe in. And it's not the money - with her knowledge and expertise there are plenty of places that she could have worked and would have made more. It just doesn't pass the logic test.

    She has done good things for the CAA including all of the research projects that were started under her watch. The CAA contributed to the Light research and if I understand correctly, had initiated research on spinal fluid, which has seeded the bigger research that just broke in the news recently.

    We all are frustrated as he## about the pace of research on our illness, but let's encourage the people that are making headway for us and figure out how we can partner with them to make it better.
     
  10. LaurelW

    LaurelW Senior Member

    Messages:
    602
    Likes:
    228
    Utah
    My favorite thing that Suzanne has done is her scathing review of the negative XMRV papers by the CDC last summer. I'd like to see more of that.
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page