The question I raised was whether a 'coverup' was occurring - not whether the cohorts were good (we know that they are not - and another study with a good cohort is reportedly under way) or even if the science of the CDC paper is particularly good.
At this point we are assuming the worst about the DHHS. I can understand that based on prior history but the DHHS yanked both papers back
; the CDC paper was finished first and it was published. The CFIDS Association reported that the Alter paper will be published in the next couple of weeks and Mindy Katei states her sources state it will have the same results as the original paper.
How many will contract XMRV while people play politics before someone begins working on a vaccine? Will there be any serious funding laid in for the the FY 2011 budget? Nope. The band is still playing. It's off key and sounds like hell but it's still playing.
Of course, nobody, let alone the pharmaceutical companies, will work on a vaccine until XMRV is validated. We know that Glaxo Smith Kline was ready to go with its treatment trials until the negative studies appeared. Now you can say two of those were bad studies, by people not particularly desiring to find the pathogen but as a group they were good enough for GSK to pull back. Thats an economic decision based on questions those studies brought up - to the GSK researchers - about the virus. Now they've launched their own study.
I am not trying to defend the CDC's reputation with CFS! I just don't see how the usual conspiracy theories apply here. I think this is a different situation. The CDC has a real incentive to do the best work they can in this case.
The point I was trying to make is that whatever problems we or Suzanne Vernon or Dr. Mikovits or anybody else has about the CDC study is that the CDC, itself, believes it to be accurate and true. They believe that when the dust settles their study will be left standing. They are betting their reputation - knowing that there alot of studies by good researchers with different cohorts in the works - that they are right and they know that history will prove somebody right
We shall see! They have a big group of established researchers against them; they are not just going up against Dr. Mikovits, there's Dr. Ruscetti (240 papers to his name), Dr. Silverman (250 + papers to his name!), Harvey Alter (200 + papers to his name!) going against (74 ) and Heineine (135 papers).
Right now the CDC folks are outmatched. Nobody wants to lose this game