As reporter, if the news only affected researchers and CFs community, no press release, I would think. Press release is because you expect lots of phone calls from reporters and you put your answers out to keep from having to repeat yourself again and again. Also is sometimes done when you have news positive about your own organization and you hope a press release will prompt a news story.
If, and we still don't know it is for sure, a press release is coming, then it has news of matter of public concern. Given it is public health agency, would likely be news of public health concern.
I can't imagine CDC would do study that says they can't find it if Germans, Japanese, Cleveland Clinic and WPI can find it at 1-6% of healthy controls. Coming out with completely negative would be too embarrassing.
Might show in population at large, but not in CFS patients at higher rate. I can't see this because NCI and CC also helped in study finding it in higher rate of CFS patients, and they have no great concern for CFS patients. They are cancer folks.
As for statement that they would realize the results along the way, not so as far as finding it in higher rate in CFS patients. Likely, like the WPI / CC / NCI study, the samples were blinded. Meaning the rate in CFS patients would not be determined until they were unblinded in the end.
Now, another possibility, they didn't test CFS patients at all, but instead tested healthy people and prostate cancer patients. And if they found it higher in prostate cancer patients, that would also calll for public statement.
Still all of this confuses me, since as I said above, I can't see them releasing positive study results connecting to disabling illness until there is a commercial test.
At the same time, I guess, if it is found out they had the results and held them for four months, then that would be unethical and against a Hippocratic oath. (Do researchers take that oath?)
I just hope Cort's buzz statement is true and we aren't all getting anxious when there isn't a press release.
Tina