gracenote
All shall be well . . .
- Messages
- 1,537
- Location
- Santa Rosa, CA
Is XMRV a New Paradigm for CFS?
The Role of the Scientific Consensus Process in the XMRV Debate
A guest editorial from the CFIDS Association, April 7, 2010
Please follow the link above for the rest of the article.
The Role of the Scientific Consensus Process in the XMRV Debate
A guest editorial from the CFIDS Association, April 7, 2010
CFIDS Association: This month we introduce a new periodic feature, a guest editorial on a research topic of high interest to our readers. Kurt Rowley, PhD, shares his view about the formal and informal process of achieving consensus in his essay. In it he represents his own views and not those of any other organization.
Please follow the link above for the rest of the article.
Is XMRV a New Paradigm for CFS?
The Role of the Scientific Consensus Process in the XMRV Debate
Kurt Rowley, Ph.D.
Independent Researcher & Writer
In Thomas Kuhn's famous book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions [1] the term 'paradigm shift' was defined as a change in the basic assumptions and explanations for an entire field of science. The discovery of XMRV by PCR in CFS patient samples reported by Lombardi et al [2] suggests a possible paradigm shift. If the correlation between CFS and XMRV could be validated to the satisfaction of the scientific community and a causal model identified and proven, this would be a game changer in the science of CFS. The XMRV discovery then would have a dramatic effect on not only treatment options but also on the politics of CFS. These points have all been well noted by CFS researchers, patients, and advocacy groups. However early confirmation attempts have failed to find XMRV in several patient groups [3-5], and many more studies are reportedly in progress. The debate over who is right has begun both among scientists and the CFS community. How will this all play out, how and when will patients have an answer about XMRV? Where will the answers come from? In order to address those questions, I believe some background in the scientific consensus process is helpful, as only the science, and not the political or medical needs of any faction in the debate, will determine the validity of the XMRV hypothesis for CFS.