yes, I thought of the glove slap:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P16J0ejFToY
But to me it is more of a "ball is in your court" statement.
Some comments....
I know in news coverage, that usually, a public challenge statement is after private communications. It is just courtesy to not air out exposures and criticism until after you try to work it out privately. The reason is once you make such a public statement, you put the person in the position to save face publicly. This impedes cooperation. And so if you actually want to get something accomplished, you try private cooperation first. So, I figure...
Could be they gave up after numerous efforts.
Could be they were waiting for McClure to make her own corrections in the Plos One. They finally decided they have had enough time and if McClure wasn't going to do it, they would.
Could be this is response to McClure's interview where she said Lombardi have been talking about cohort difference "ad nauseum." That is demeaning. You could almost see McClure's eyes rolling. Also, she said they rushed the study because there was unethical people, they heard and read on the Internet, offering tests for a fee before a standard test had been established and cause was established. That was a slap to WPI which has cooperated with VIP, which is offering tests for a fee. McClure also mentioned AZT, which has nothing to do with WPI.
Also, all these rumors that WPI won't cooperate, won't give reagents, etc. This needed to be corrected. After time to have those who know better say so, WPI said it themselves.
One of two things. Either all these other folks can't find it because of their arrogance or their agenda.
Or
WPI is seeing a ghost. They are seeing it when it isn't there. "Oops, what was that. It looked like a XMRV. Well, I'm gonna call it positive."
I saw in the beginning that some, I think McClure was one who said this in the lay press, speculated that WPI had contamination problems. But that argument has been settled.
So the only other explanation for those who criticize WPI is that WPI thinks they see it but they are seeing something else. Is anyone making this claim? No. I don't see anyone making this claim. So, Dutch and UK folks, is this the case? Or is WPI committing a science fraud. If you are right, then WPI must be wrong in their tests of the very same samples. So which is it? WPI is claiming to see something that isn't there or they are committing fraud?
By the way, I bet those Whittemore folks are hopping mad. I have seen Anne Whittemore interviewed multiple times. She is very politically correct, very courteous, very cooperative and yielding. Remember, she has been a lobbyist wife for years. She knows the whole "attract more from honey" thing. Remember her comments in front of CFSAC? For her to do this means she has been pushed to the edge.
Tina