I disagree, there is no trouble for the 0/0 studies in the Silverman sequence problem. If everyone had just run gag and env sequences, as WPI did,then maybe this would cause some issues. Fortunately, most of the 0/0 studies used broader, and more sensitive tests, including the pol gene, which MUST be present in a viable virus, even if it is integrated in the host DNA. And the pol gene is stable in the entire MLV family (it is the 'conserved portion' of the viral genome that is required for replication and can not mutate or the virus loses viabillity). Therefore, the specific VP-62 MLV sequence that was retracted is not changing the general conclusions. The 0/0 studies overwhelmingly demonstrated that there is no MLV family in ME/CFS patient samples, contradicting the WPI hypothesis. Not true, the negative findings are still valid, they were testing more than what WPI had tested, these labs used more sensitive and more modern tests than WPI, and they tested for the conserved portion as I mentioned above, which WPI did not. This is false logic, Silverman's primers are not the only variable here, and you can not conclude that their failure invalidates all the 0/0 studies, just not true. That gel showed nothing significant and is far less important than the PCR testing which has conclusively ruled-out MLV species infection in ME/CFS blood. Maybe in the 1990s that would have been true, with older PCR test designs like those WPI used. However, modern PCR testing, like was used in most if not all the 0/0 studies, takes this into account, they know about the G & C rich areas, their triple hydrogen bonds, and can extract the DNA sequences successfully. As just mentioned, the DNA was properly amplified, and some of the studies tested against live XMRV viral samples, so in fact they had no trouble detecting MLV integrated into human cells, including in the G&C rich areas. And again, unlike WPI the outside labs tested the pol gene, so does not matter whether VP-62 was 'recalled' or not, its pol gene is the same as the rest of the MLV family, by definition it has to be, or it is not in the family. I've already disproved this claim. There is ABSOLUTELY NO TRUTH to the above statement and nothing has been invalidated except the original WPI hypothesis and the Science study. So there is a conspiracy here? Why on earth would these people conspire against us? They would not, and have not, and the facts can speak for themselves to those who know the science, or have access to credentialed researchers, which I was lucky to have two years ago. I realize some people want to continue propping-up their hopes for XMRV, or now for some other MLV/HGRV, but they need to look somewhere else than what was presented here. The argument that Silverman's retraction invalidates the 0/0 studies is not based on fact.