Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by V99, Jul 6, 2010.
I totally agree with the earlier comments.
Let the good, real science speak for itself.
Why does only one paper have to have further validation and, that paper, produced by an eminent virologist who discovered the Hepatitis C virus. His credentials are unassailable.
Where and whom are the stellar minds of the CDC to compete with this level of ability and to question their findings.
How dare they presume to question the work of Alter, Silverman, Mikovits, Coffin et al, all acknowledged experts in the field of virology/retrovirology.
Let the truth speak.
Thou the articles are wrong due to confusion of what ME which is also called CFS is and the confusion with idiopathic chronic fatigue .. it greatly concerns me that taking actions against journals like Wall Street Journal, may not end up supporting us and may backfire. We need journals to be on our side, not for them to see us as such a big issue that they actually stop reporting altogether. I worry that we will end up being tabooed and reporting on CFS thrown in the too hard, too confusing basket.
CFS/ME NEEDS publically and Wall Street Journal hasnt been biased, i think they've been quite good to us seeing there is sooo much confusion out there, they are not to know what is right and what is wrong here, they are not medical professions, all they can do is listen to medical professionals and do articles to the best of their ability. It's Wessely who should be being sued!! It's Wessley who gets the wrong info out and makes the journals get it wrong.
Hi Tania - just to clarify, the comments discussed above were directed to BMJ (British Medical Journal, the medical journal that published the McClure/Wessely negative XMRV/CFS study, not WSJ (Wall Street Journal) the newspaper.
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.