I don't have the energy to ferret out people's backgrounds or go through their prior posts but LJS did make some good points in his first post.
Although there is certainly bias at work in all sorts of places, journals included, the question is how much is there or how it is working. Leaves made a post in another thread that Retrovirology likely grouped these papers together as part of a special issue rather than as a specific attack against ME/CFS patients, etc. And I would agree with her. Lots of times, journals will issue a call for specific types of papers to be submitted or will have several papers submitted about the same topic and choose to publish them together in a special issue. There are certainly institutions and person who have proved over a period of time that they are biased (e.g. the CDC) and we should point out their inconsistencies, errors, etc. publicly and broadly but I don't think it is helpful to attack journals or scientists immediately. We'll probably earn more enemies than allies that way. The question is whether Retrovirology is equally interested in printing positive infectious disese findings in ME/CFS and that remains to be seen.
I think a bigger problem than scientists just talking about contamination or XMRV is that they just leave it at that. I don't think people would be as angry or frustrated if researchers were concerned/ dedicated to finding out the causes of ME/CFS honestly, whether it is XMRV or not, whether it is an infectious disease or not. That is why Alter's statement about the need to get to the bottom of ME/CFS, whether XMRV is or is not the cause, was greeted with warmth.
Personally, I would love to see XMRV proven to be the cause much like everyone else but ultimately, the truth is more important to me than the politics although the latter must be faced.
The ones i attack are not my allies lol, so i couldnt care too hoots about upsetting them, they will still stab us in the backs when they get there chance, even if we dont say BOO to them.
would be surprised if they did print positive papers,And some of the conclusions were indeed strectching too far. For the greatest impact against the xmrv discovery. I can not prove that the all in row release was a setup, to cause as much impact as possible, knowing full well the uk press would run the XMRV IS DEAD CRAP. but you can also not prove they did not. Funny thats what happened though isnt it lol. surprises surprise. Maybe we should save up 4 positive papers and ask them to print them all in a row, proving contamination is not a issue. wonder if they will ? about time we used such tactics that are purely just coincidence then, oh i lied he he, actually they didnt all get released the same day AND SAVED.
The journal decided this will knock the believers sideways when the KNOWN NEGATIVE PRESS GETS CONVINCED WITH SO MANY PAPERS ALL SAYING THE SAME THING, HELL IT MUST BE TRUE RIGHT. yeah lets run the, its all over story, purely by coincidence mind. I respectfully dissagree.