Interview with Ian Lipkin: posted

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Dr. Lipkin is a scientist who is/has been a great benefit to our community and willing to go out on a limb for us. He's added to the credibility of our condition.

So I'm a bit confused about the negative comments.

Barb
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
18,145
I'm saying that the current medical-scientific paradigm is broken. It doesn't work for complex modern chronic multi-factorial diseases such as ME. Re: Lipkin - I don't expect someone who has spent their entire life within a paradigm, and has been highly successful, to suddenly abandon that paradigm.

Abandon that paradigm for what alternative, though? It's not as if there is a proposed solution.

In any case, the current scientific paradigm works fine for complex multi-factorial diseases; it's just that with multiple causal factors involved, it takes longer to uncover the causes. This is analogous to taking longer to crack more complex passwords, compared to short simple passwords, due to the increased permutations involved.

One example of a science tackling complex multi-factorial disease is in this study of a mouse model of Crohn's disease. This study found that Crohn's can be precipitated by a norovirus infection, but only when both a specific gene variant is present, and a certain toxin has damaged the gut. Without any one of these three factors, Crohn's will not manifest in this murine model.

So this gives a causal equation for murine Crohn's:

Crohn's = norovirus + gene variant + toxin

More info in this article: Equations that Spell Disaster: Researchers are pinpointing the factors that combine to produce complex diseases.


Dr Chia provided another interesting equation for the triggering of ME/CFS: he found that the combination of an acute enterovirus infection plus simultaneous administration of corticosteroids in the patient during the acute stage of the infection has a higher chance of precipitating ME/CFS than just an enterovirus infection alone.

And of course the study of disease comorbidities gives further clues to the causal factors that might be involved. So, for example, the fact that IBS is a common comorbidity of ME/CFS suggests that the pathophysiologies taking place in IBS may also be contributing factors to ME/CFS.


It is true, however, that some scientists have a desire to find a single cause for a disease. But then, it is within the realms of possibility that ME/CFS does have a single cause — a single cause that might make patients susceptible to enterovirus, etc, infections, for example. Though I personally would wager that ME/CFS arises from multiple simultaneous causes, not a single cause.

One day I think we will know the causal equation or equations for ME/CFS.
 
Last edited:

garcia

Aristocrat Extraordinaire
Messages
976
Location
UK
In any case, the current scientific paradigm works fine for complex multi-factorial diseases

To quote Dr Phil: "How's that working for you?". Where is the cure / treatment for MS, Alzheimer's, ALS, RA, Lupus, Parkinsons, Chron's, Autism etc, etc ? Where has the billions spent on researching those diseases under the current medico-scientific paradigm led us? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome is the very definition of madness. If those other diseases which have had much more funding than ME have produced nothing for patients, what is the likelihood that if we follow their research paradigms, but with much less money, we will produce anything?

it's just that with multiple causal factors involved, it takes longer to uncover the causes. This is analogous to taking longer to crack more complex passwords, compared to short simple passwords, due to the increased permutations involved.

Passwords is a good analogy. Lets say we are doing a brute-force search. A 6 letter password may take seconds to crack. A 7 letter password may take minutes. An 8 letter password hours. But a 100-letter password may take longer than the age of the universe.You can't then say that brute-force is a good method to crack a 100-letter password! It is clearly not. The whole science of cryptography relies on that fact.

Similarly just because the existing medico-scientific system has helped simple illnesses does not mean it will work for complex chronic multi-system illnesses in a reasonable length of time. All the evidence says it won't (the abject lack of progress in curing multi-system chronic diseases is proof of that).

So the existing methodology of forming a grant proposal, raising money for that grant proposal, finding collaborators, getting regulatory approval, doing the study, analysing the data, writing a paper, submitting that paper for review to a journal, correcting the paper based on feedback from referees, waiting until the paper is finally published, may take 2-3 years. That's if everything goes as planned. None of that is based around the need of patients. Almost all of it is based around the needs of government, academia and the pharma industry.

One example of a science tackling complex multi-factorial disease ...

How has science "tackled" Chron's disease? What is the treatment / cure offered? Steroids? It's not what I call "tackled".

he found that the combination of an acute enterovirus infection plus simultaneous administration of corticosteroids in the patient during the acute stage of the infection has a higher chance of precipitating ME/CFS than just an enterovirus infection alone.
Steroids worsen infections? This is hardly news.

And of course the study of disease comorbidities gives further clues to the causal factors that might be involved. So, for example, the fact that IBS is a common comorbidity of ME/CFS suggests that the pathophysiologies taking place in IBS may also be contributing factors to ME/CFS.
All chronic illnesses have an amazing number of things in common. The body tends to break down in certain stereotypical ways (e.g. mitochondrial dysfunction is common amongst many chronic diseases). Again this isn't anything new or earth-shattering.

Abandon that paradigm for what alternative, though? It's not as if there is a proposed solution.
Abandon the existing paradigms (which are based on 20th century technology and the needs of academia, government and pharama) for one utilizing 21st century technology, based solely around the needs of patients.

If you are willing to swallow the red pill here is an article to get you started:

http://www.azarask.in/blog/post/the-wrong-problem/
 
Last edited:

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
18,145
Steroids worsen infections? This is hardly news.

Unless you can point out to me where have you have previously read that can steroids given during an acute infection can precipitate ME/CFS, this certainly is very big news.

Where is the cure / treatment for MS, Alzheimer's, ALS, RA, Lupus, Parkinsons, Chron's, Autism etc, etc ? Where has the billions spent on researching those diseases under the current medico-scientific paradigm led us?

For one thing, it has led to a vast increase in the depth of our understanding of the body. There is still a long way to go, but the understanding of biology has exploded over the last few decades, and continues to do so. You are not going to cure any disease unless you understand its biological underpinnings.

How has science "tackled" Chron's disease? What is the treatment / cure offered? Steroids? It's not what I call "tackled".
Did you read the article? The study authors worked out the precise multi-factoral causal mechanism in that murine model of Crohn's. So this shows, contrary to what you said, that it is possible to undercover the multi-factoral etiology of a complex disease.

Abandon the existing paradigms (which are based on 20th century technology and the needs of academia, government and pharama) for one utilizing 21st century technology, based solely around the needs of patients.

That is being a revolutionary without a revolution.

Unless you have a better system, or some good suggestions as to how to create one, you certainly do not want to abandon the current system.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
18,145
I should add this: I think a major obstacle to scientific progress in understanding disease etiology is not so much the complexity of disease, but the internal politics of scientific ideas.

Often some very good ideas and leads that scientists have may come up with get totally stifled by their peers. As an example: I recently had some communication with an Alzheimer's researcher, who is investigating the link between Alzheimer's and herpes simplex virus infection of the brain. It's quite conceivable that a subset of Alzheimer's may be cause by this virus if it gets into the brain, as there is a proven association between HSV and Alzheimer's.

However, I was told by this researcher that because some very influential scientists in the Alzheimer's field are against the idea that an infectious agent could cause Alzheimer's, they block grant applications for studies that want to examine the HSV–Alzheimer's connection. It is deeply frustrating for these researchers.

I wonder just how many good ME/CFS studies have been blocked because of the internal politics of scientific ideas. This may be precisely what happen to Dr Lipkin's grant application: it met some powerful and influential researchers who simply just did not like the idea that ME/CFS has an infectious etiology.

I think the battle of competing scientific ideas is an issue that should be focused on, in terms of an area which needs a big overhaul. Powerful and influential researchers should not be able to block and stiffle innovative new scientific idea just because those ideas contradict the scientific worldview of these influential researchers. The scientific funding process seems to operate a little too much like a totalitarian state, rather than a democratic one.
 

A.B.

Senior Member
Messages
3,780
However, I was told by this researcher that because some very influential scientists in the Alzheimer's field are against the idea that an infectious agent could cause Alzheimer's, they block grant applications for studies that want to examine the HSV–Alzheimer's connection. It is deeply frustrating for these researchers.

Just out of curiosity, what are the current ideas on the cause(s) of Alzheimer's?
 

Firestormm

Senior Member
Messages
5,055
Location
Cornwall England
From the original interview:
Lipkin: I wish I could get samples from either of those outbreaks. I can’t. They don’t exist. We’ve been asking for them for years.

Kitei: [Dr. Daniel] Peterson doesn’t have them?

Lipkin: He’s sending us some materials. Maybe we will find something. There’s some mantle cell lymphoma. He’s got very few samples, because most of it went to WPI [Whittemore-Peterson Institute], and they refuse to return it to him. Believe me, we are doing everything we can. It’s an incredibly depressing, humbling experience. It’s so much more difficult than 99 percent of what I do day-to-day.

From the comments:
Annette WhittemoreMay 12, 2014 at 4:51 PM

Dr. Lipkin is misinformed. Had he contacted Dr. Lombardi, before making these statements, he would know that none of the samples from the original outbreak came to WPI nor have we retained any samples belonging to Dr. Peterson.

As to collaboration, WPI researchers welcome the opportunity to work with other researchers and physicians.
 

Firestormm

Senior Member
Messages
5,055
Location
Cornwall England
Health Rising takes a look at Mindy's interview with Dr Lipkin:

Missing Pathogens, Psychosomatic Directors and Serving the ME/CFS Community Dr Ian Lipkin on ME/CFS

The Ian Lipkins of the world don’t come around very often for ME/CFS. He’s an opportunity we don’t want to miss… a resource we can’t afford to waste.

We had him for a time 20 years ago and then lost him and now he’s back again – for now. He’s a busy man. He’s in demand. Something is always popping up.

We want to get as firmly embedded with Dr. Lipkin as we can. We don’t want this to be our year or two with Ian Lipkin before he moves onto something else because he can’t get funding.

Let’s support his, or as he said, our microbiome project. (It”s probably worth a million dollars just to keep Lipkin and 60 person Center for Immunity engaged.)

“We’re trying to find solutions to an important problem, so I want to be very clear to your readers that it is their project. It was organically developed in response to their needs, and their wishes, and we’re eager to serve.” “Eager to serve!”

How often have you heard that in connection with ME/CFS? It chokes me up a bit.

Let’s keep Ian Lipkin in the game, serving the ME/CFS community. Let’s support the microbiome project that he thinks could be the answer to ME/CFS.
Support the Crowdfunding Effort here

Find the Mindy Kitei-Ian Lipkin interview here.

Read more: The Kitei-Lipkin Interview: Missing Pathogens, Psychosomatic Directors and Serving the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Community http://www.cortjohnson.org/blog/201...c-directors-serving-chronic-fatigue-syndrome/
 
Last edited:

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
Couldn't agree more! Please donate to the study - the link is in my signature.
 
Back