The results could have completely changed - that's why the DHHS asked him to do new testing - that's why we have been checking PNAS so frequently. Nobody knew what the ultimate results of the new study would be. ( I think I've had my say on this...that's enough for me )
And would you think that the study who found 80% XMRV and confirmed lombardi study, if they found other results in 2 weeks or so retesting, that they would publish it in weeks?
thats no good reasoning: first u find 80% and present at zagreb, after months of studying and testing , FDA and NIH
and lets say that after some additional testing, which only took 2 weeks or so you find nothing, and then you say: okay lets publish this totally contradictive result. no you wont you would go back to things again, and work it all over. it doesnt make sense.
so the fact that the paper was so fast again offered for review to PNAS already made 99,999% sure that it still was positive
for me , i stalked PNAS NOT because i has fear about the paper being negative, but i just want to see that the paper REALLY is released, after all the CDC/ DHHS blocking stories. i think many of us were, at least for a moment, afraid that it wouldt come any more, after the negative CDC paper and the whole strange things that happened before and after that.
So I just stalk PNAS because i want to see that it is really there, although i said before that i heard it would be september, and i still hope it will be sooner.