Lipkin presenting at WPI

[eric_s]

By the way, it looks as if he already has plans to do it. There's a thread about it here.

 

[Bob]

Dr Jamie Deckoff-Jones mentions Ian Lipkin's visit to the WPI, and his XMRV study, in her latest X Rx blog entry:
http://treatingxmrv.blogspot.com/2011/07/treaure-hunt.html?spref=fb&forumid=331851

 

[eric_s]

Thanks, Bob. It was interesting to read. Good to see that the WPI seem to be confident about the set up. Since all the samples go to Dr. Lipkin's lab, i think this is probably the crucial point, with the most potential for something to go wrong. And i'm not talking about tampering, but about anything that might influence the outcome.

What i don't like too much, is that she says she's aiming at healing, not curing. While curing will probably take longer, i think this always must be the end goal. Also i don't really like the quote at the end of her post, but no problem, i don't have to agree with everything...

 

[Bob]

Thanks, Bob. It was interesting to read. Good to see that the WPI seem to be confident about the set up. Since all the samples go to Dr. Lipkin's lab, i think this is probably the crucial point, with the most potential for something to go wrong. And i'm not talking about tampering, but about anything that might influence the outcome.

I'm slightly concerned that Ian Lipkin isn't directly overseeing the blood draws.
I thought that he would set up his own team to draw blood, who would use a standardised and systematic process to draw the blood, and freeze it quickly.
It seems to me that using so many different teams, and settings, to draw the blood will introduce many unnecessary variables.

What i don't like too much, is that she says she's aiming at healing, not curing. While curing will probably take longer, i think this always must be the end goal.

I think that she is saying that there currently isn't a cure for ME, but that we should still aim to heal. She isn't saying that we shouldn't seek to find a cure.

 

[eric_s]

I'm slightly concerned that Ian Lipkin isn't directly overseeing the blood draws.
I thought that he would set up his own team to draw blood, who would use a standardised and systematic process to draw the blood, and freeze it quickly.
It seems to me that using so many different teams, and settings, to draw the blood will introduce many unnecessary variables.

Yes, that's true. But then on the other hand it also reduces the chance for one error to in one place to screw everything up. So i don't know it it's worse this way.

 

[Bob]

Yes, that's true. But then on the other hand it also reduces the chance for one error to in one place to screw everything up. So i don't know it it's worse this way.

Yes, that's a good point.

 

[anciendaze]

Around 67:15 (didn't check again now, but i think it's there) he basically says: "Please give me a cheque, then i'm more than happy to do it". So it seems, once again, the problem is the lacking funding. And Judy is nodding about 100 times while he says that.

Depending on the outcome of the Lipkin study he might not be the one we want to be associated with, but i really think this is our main problem and what we should think about most. How do we get more funding?

There is considerably more to his remarks about funding than just ME/CFS, that request for donations also applies to MS, Parkinson's and diabetes. It might also apply to Alzheimer's. He makes it clear powerful new tools are available.

The question to ask the powers that be at NIH is "Are you telling us you don't have $1 million to spend on innovative new research on conditions affecting millions of people because the $25 billion/year you have been getting barely covers the unproductive research which has left these problems where they are?"