Last night the Wall Street Journal published Amy Marcus's article "Chronic-Fatigue Paper Called Into Question." Here is my response:
As a science reporter and blogger, what I find most perplexing about the Science editors asking Dr. Mikovits to withdraw her study is that the jury is clearly still out. While some laboratories haven’t found XMRV in CFS patients, others have. The ones that haven’t found XMRV failed to replicate the methods and patient cohort of the original Science study, making their findings questionable. The laboratories that have found the retrovirus include a study by National Institutes of Health Lasker Award winner Dr. Harvey Alter and the FDA’s Dr. Shyh-Ching Lo. Their study found variants of XMRV in 86 percent of patients and 7 percent of apparently healthy controls. All the controls were blood donors, signaling a contamination of the blood supply.
In addition, the original Science study was coauthored by the Cleveland Clinic and the National Cancer Institute, both of which also found the retrovirus in CFS patients. Moreover, other laboratories have found the retrovirus in CFS patients but have not yet published their findings. And, finally, respected laboratories have found the retrovirus in prostate cancer patients as well, making the contamination theory less than likely.
Given that others have replicated Mikovits’ findings, given the high stakes in a population that has no treatment after 30 years of government neglect, given that many CFS patients have died from the disease and many others experience a living death, I find it problematic that Science has asked Dr. Mikovits to withdraw the paper.
Some see this move as the first step to shutting down current NIH-sponsored XMRV CFS studies, as the government did 20 years ago, when the first evidence of a retrovirus in CFS patients surfaced at the Wistar Institute at the University of Pennsylvania. Back then, the Centers for Disease Control refused to replicate the methods of Wistar’s Dr. Elaine DeFreitas. When the CDC couldn’t replicate her findings, the research died. Twenty years later, it’s deja vu all over again.
Science seems to be hell bent on consensus, but as Harvard-educated physician and medical thriller writer Dr. Michael Crichton once pronounced: “Let’s be clear: The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right....”
Whether Dr. Mikovits is right is anyone’s guess. But asking her to withdraw her paper before the truth is known is the antithesis of science.
In addition, the original Science study was coauthored by the Cleveland Clinic and the National Cancer Institute, both of which also found the retrovirus in CFS patients. Moreover, other laboratories have found the retrovirus in CFS patients but have not yet published their findings. And, finally, respected laboratories have found the retrovirus in prostate cancer patients as well, making the contamination theory less than likely.
Given that others have replicated Mikovits’ findings, given the high stakes in a population that has no treatment after 30 years of government neglect, given that many CFS patients have died from the disease and many others experience a living death, I find it problematic that Science has asked Dr. Mikovits to withdraw the paper.
Some see this move as the first step to shutting down current NIH-sponsored XMRV CFS studies, as the government did 20 years ago, when the first evidence of a retrovirus in CFS patients surfaced at the Wistar Institute at the University of Pennsylvania. Back then, the Centers for Disease Control refused to replicate the methods of Wistar’s Dr. Elaine DeFreitas. When the CDC couldn’t replicate her findings, the research died. Twenty years later, it’s deja vu all over again.
Science seems to be hell bent on consensus, but as Harvard-educated physician and medical thriller writer Dr. Michael Crichton once pronounced: “Let’s be clear: The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right....”
Whether Dr. Mikovits is right is anyone’s guess. But asking her to withdraw her paper before the truth is known is the antithesis of science.
.jpg){kind=small}
Very well said! Thank you, Mindy!
ReplyDeleteAs ever Mindy, you eloquently elucidate what we are all thinking. Thankyou.
ReplyDeleteWell put, Mindy. Yes, it IS perplexing. "Science" made a big fuss initially and forced the WPI to prove absolutely that there was no contamination and that the results were true. So why the back-pedalling? Was this a spontaneous change of mind? Did they take fright at the number of negative studies published in journals of lower repute than "Science"? Very unlikely. OR - my theory, and it's just a theory - is that someone, somewhere, has been whispering in their ears. If they exist - the Dark Force that is - they are showing their hand in becoming increasingly desperate to block the WPI's work. Already the WPI is finding it almost impossible to get their work published. They are getting no Government funding for XMRV research, and although they won a sum from the Chase Giving fund, this was only enough to pay the salary of one researcher or maybe two technicians for a year. The idea of the "editorial expression of concern" proposed now , when everything is up in the air still, is not something you expect from professional people like the staff of "Science".
ReplyDeleteOne thing we can do to help WPI is to support them in the Vivint contest, in which charities are in line to win $250,000 through daily voting via Facebook.
ReplyDeletePeople with ME are generally broke but this is free money - we just have to show our support with a click of the button.
Info about it is here:http://forums.phoenixrising.me/content.php?434-Win-money-for-ME-CFS-Research-Round-II-1.25-million-Vivint-Facebook-Contest