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!
The Pathway to Prevention (P2P) for ME/CFS: A Dangerous Process
Gabby Klein gives an overview of the P2P process, shedding light on the pitfalls with advice as to what we can do in protest ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

XMRV: Lo et al paper retracted by author

Discussion in 'Media, Interviews, Blogs, Talks, Events about XMRV' started by Firestormm, Dec 26, 2011.

  1. joshualevy

    joshualevy

    Messages:
    48
    Likes:
    24
    It's totally scientific. Remember that a peer reviewed article is published because three groups agree on it's quality: the authors, the editors, and the peer reviewers. If any one of those groups comes to believe that the paper is bad, then retracting it is the right thing to do. I know a lot of editors want consensus among the authors before retracting, but that is not required. For my part, I think that if even one author has come to believe that the paper is bad, then it should be retracted. But that is just me. Different editors can have different rules, but there is no question that the editors (representing the journal itself) have the duty to retract articles that they think are wrong. Not the just the ability, but the duty. It's part of the scientific, peer review checks-and-balences system.

    Joshua (not Jay) Levy
    Waverunner and Firestormm like this.
  2. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes:
    774
    Hi barb,

    Do you remember you tried to look into the latest state of Singh's prostate cancer research. And it seemed then that she had given a talk on her latest findings but to a closed meeting?
    http://forums.phoenixrising.me/show...ing-of-controversy-in-the-XMRV-CFS-link/page2
    Do you know how she is getting on with her prostate cancer work now?
    And does she believe it to be contamination as Paprotka says? When is she going to retract her papers?
    And if not, does the asymmetry in the way ME is treated with regard to prostate cancer a cause for concern?

  3. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,455
    Likes:
    870
    I thought I answered this but with this DD you never know. I will search but this is what I remember. I do know that Dr.Singh gave a talk about her latest research so that may be influencing what she is able to say. (edit. I see you addressed this.)

    I contacted several scientiest and they seemed to agree that eventually she will have to agree it's contamination. There is also a podcast by Vincent Racaniello that addresses this.

    I might email Trine Tsouderos and ask her. She gets back to you quickly.

    I am not concerned, at least at this point as we don't know all the circumstances as to why she hasn't spoken about this. She is a very good scientist.

    I will look for these when I can. Perhaps you or others might want to contact some people. or point to some resources. You know how it can be during the holidays. :>)
    Firestormm likes this.
  4. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,455
    Likes:
    870
  5. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,974
    Cornwall England
    Full retraction now published in PNAS: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/12/20/1119641109 although it doesn't appear any different or more thorough than we have already seen:

    Retraction

    MEDICAL SCIENCES


    Retraction for Detection of MLV-related virus gene sequences in blood of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and healthy blood donors, by Shyh-Ching Lo, Natalia Pripuzova, Bingjie Li, Anthony L. Komaroff, Guo-Chiuan Hung, Richard Wang, and Harvey J. Alter, which appeared in issue 36, September 7, 2010, of Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (107:1587415879; first published August 23, 2010; 10.1073/pnas.1006901107).

    The authors wish to note the following: Although our published findings were reproducible in our laboratory and while there has been no evidence of contamination using sensitive mouse mitochondrial DNA or IAP assays or in testing coded panels, we have the following concerns:

    1. The original chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) patient samples were of insufficient volume to distribute to other laboratories for independent confirmation.

    2. Only one (1) of many laboratories has found a similar association between polytropic murine leukemia viruses
    (pMLV) and CFS and a careful study of 100 CFS patients (2), as well as a coded panel recently constructed by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (3), have found no evidence for either xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus (XMRV) or pMLVs in CFS patient samples.

    3. Our attempts, through collaborations, to demonstrate antibody in affected patients, to isolate the virus by culture, or to show integration sites in the human genome have failed to support the initial findings.

    4. While recall of eight patients from the original cohort 15 y later showed pMLV gag sequences in seven, the copy number was very low and phylogenetic analysis showed these sequences were not direct descendents of the original dominant strains (4). Still later samples from four of these patients tested negative in the NHLBI panel. While this result could be explained by viral clearance over time, it fails to support a sustained retroviral infection in human cells.

    Although a more definitive, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)sponsored, coded panel of samples from 150 well-characterized and geographically diverse CFS patients and controls is being assembled for further study, in consideration of the aggregate data from our own laboratory and that of others, it is our current view that the association of murine gamma retroviruses with CFS has not withstood the test of time or of independent verification and that this association is now tenuous.

    Therefore, we retract the conclusions in our article.

    Shyh-Ching Lo
    Natalia Pripuzova
    Bingjie Li
    Anthony L. Komaroff
    Guo-Chiuan Hung
    Richard Wang
    Harvey J. Alter

    1. Hanson MR, et al. (2011) Detection of MLV-like gag sequences in blood samples from a New York state CFS cohort. Retrovirology 8(Suppl 1):A234.

    2. Shin CH, et al. (2011) Absence of XMRV retrovirus and other murine leukemia virus-related viruses in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. J Virol 85:71957202.

    3. Simmons G, et al.; Blood XMRV Scientific Research Working Group (SRWG) (2011) Failure to confirm XMRV/MLVs in the blood of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: a multi-laboratory study. Science 334:814817 10.1126/science.1213841.

    4. Katzourakis A, Hu S, Kellam P, Towers GJ (2011) Phylogenetic analysis of murine leukemia virus sequences from longitudinally sampled chronic fatigue syndrome patients suggests PCR contamination rather than viral evolution. J Virol 85: 1090910913.

    www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1119641109
  6. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,974
    Cornwall England
    Of course Hanson - cited above as a reference (1) had this to say recently about her study:

    'The retraction takes away the only paper still left suggesting a role for murine viruses in CFS. Support for Lo and Alter's study has also come from Cornell University's Maureen Hanson, who at meetings has also reported finding MLV-like sequences in CFS patients. In an e-mail to ScienceInsider, Hanson writes that she has not submitted those results for publication, "because we cannot determine whether or not these findings were due to contamination." Hanson believes a second large multilab study, led by Ian Lipkin of Columbia University, will provide the final answer. "I am reserving judgment until it is completed," she says. '

    http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/12/authors-pull-the-plug-on-second.html?ref=hp
  7. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,974
    Cornwall England
    I think they just got back from their holiday-break...

    The Scientist: 3 January 2012: http://the-scientist.com/2012/01/03/another-chronic-fatigue-study-retracted/

    Another Chronic Fatigue Study Retracted

    After Science pulls the original article linking a mouse virus to the chronic fatigue syndrome, PNAS follows suit, yanking the only other study supporting the link.


    Just before 2012 dawned, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences retracted a 2010 paper claiming that chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is related to a murine virus. Seven coauthors, among them researchers from the US Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health, signed the retraction, which stated that while the blood samples they collected from CFS patients were not contaminated, they had failed to support the initial findings with follow-up studies. The move came after Science retracted the first paperpublished in 2009to posit a link between the syndrome and a mouse virus.

    The retraction deals another significant blow to the hypothesis that the mysterious syndrome is related in some way to murine viruses. The PNAS paper was the only published account to support the link aside from the original paper, coauthored by embattled researcher Judy Mikovits, formerly of the Whittemore Peterson Institute in Reno, Nevada, who faces criminal and civil charges for stealing property from her lab after being fired from her post. That paper linked a mouse virus called XMRV to CFS.

    The claimed link was controversial, and researchers had published results that contravened it soon after. But the PNAS paper, which claimed to find murine leukemia virus (MLV)-related viruses in blood samples from CFS patients, seemed to support the XMRV findings. Subsequent studies pointed to problems with some of the conclusions made by the seven-person team, finding error in their claim that viruses detected in the patients blood 15 years after they gave the samples containing the MLV-related viruses were descended from the viruses present in their blood when they gave the samples in the 1990s.

    In my mind, [the authors] should have [retracted the PNAS paper] months ago, Jonathan Stoye of the Medical Research Council National Institute for Medical Research in London, told ScienceInsider. Stoye was a coauthor on a 2011 PLoS ONE study that questioned the results of the PNAS paper, specifically the claim that the PNAS authors had observed the evolution of the MLV-related virus in the CFS patients.
  8. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,455
    Likes:
    870
    Prostate Cancer Research

    Sorry to take so long to get back to you.

    I think the handwriting is on the wall, so to speak. I have no idea why Singh hasn't said anything. I had heard that since the other papers had so much publicity they were the first to fail. She may be involved in further studies that are ongoing but these are speculation on my part. See below.

    PubMed articles:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22162557

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22022417

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21765437

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21447170

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21414229

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21551158

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21573232

    From the second to the last URL:

    ETA

    Could Singh be involved in these studies?
    Firestormm likes this.
  9. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,974
    Cornwall England
    Handy having all those in the one place Barb thanks.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page