ProHealth health Vitamin and Natural Supplement Store and Health
Home  |  Log In  |  My Account  |  View Cart  View Your ProHealth Vitamin and Supplement Shopping Cart
800-366-6056  |  Contact Us  |  Help
Facebook Google Plus
Fibromyalgia  Chronic Fatigue Syndrome & M.E.  Lyme Disease  Natural Wellness  Supplement News  Forums  Our Story
Store     Brands   |   A-Z Index   |   Best Sellers   |   New Products   |   Deals & Specials   |   Under $10   |   SmartSavings Club

Trending News

10 Fibro-Friendly Foods with a Bonus: Beautiful Skin

Fight Back! Win the War Being Waged Against Your Immune System

Studies Show that Magnesium L-threonate Improves Brain Plasticity, Leading to Direct and Significant...

Clary Sage Oil May Be Pricey, but Its Benefits Are Priceless

Component of red wine, grapes can help to reduce inflammation, study finds

Poly MVA: A Novel Therapy for Increasing Energy, Repairing DNA, and Promoting Overall Health

Pumpkin Pie Turmeric Breakfast Smoothie - Vegan + Gluten-Free

Vitamin D supplementation extends life in mouse model of Huntington's disease

Omega-3 fatty acid stops known trigger of lupus

Conquer Your Email Inbox, Increase Productivity and Reduce Stress

Print Page
Email Article

IACFS/ME Pres. Friedberg Examines the Rationale for the Hold on Second Positive XMRV Article

  [ 25 votes ]   [ 1 Comment ] • July 30, 2010

“It appears that the transparency and timely reporting that is so essential to science was not in evidence in this unusual government action.”

Following is a statement posted July 30 by IACFS/ME President Fred Friedberg, PhD (

* * * *

Science and the Hold on XMRV Studies

A positive XMRV study in CFS conducted by a NIH/FDA research team was accepted for publication in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) but was then put on hold apparently in June, 2010. As reported in an online editorial in Nature (July 2;, one scientist familiar with the issue said that the journal's editor-in-chief sent the paper out for further review after government agencies requested the publication delay. That review came back with requests for additional studies.

Stephen Monroe, director of the CDC's Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology, called the delay a "strategic pause" given the conflicting findings between the CDC’s own XMRV negative study in CFS - also put on hold but recently published in Retrovirology - and the positive XMRV findings of the NIH/FDA group (still unpublished). Of course, we’re concerned about a full airing of the scientific data on XMRV.  But it appears that the transparency and timely reporting that is so essential to science was not in evidence in this unusual government action.

Examining the Rationale of the Hold
Although the specific purpose of the hold was the subject of speculation among scientists and others, it was not clearly explained by any government official or journal editor. If the purpose of the hold was to re-examine conflicting data with an effort toward reconciling disparate findings, the approach taken here did not achieve this goal (as of this writing). In my view, if the extraordinary step is taken to delay conflicting peer-reviewed studies accepted for publication, then both studies should be held until all further analyses are done.

Once all additional work is completed, the research groups should review each other’s manuscripts. This should be followed, in one of the journals, with a thoughtful discussion among the investigators that examines the discrepancies between the studies with the goal of providing informed recommendations for subsequent research. Finally, both articles should be published simultaneously or as close to it as possible. This process has the potential to advance the science.

By contrast, the CDC article alone was published weeks ago without considering or even citing the findings of the PNAS paper. I argue that the CDC paper should have been held until its authors could respond to the NIH/FDA study when its additional work is completed.

If there’s still time, I would like to see the CDC and NIH/FDA research groups have a discussion of their conflicting findings with the aim of publishing their talks in the issue of PNAS that contains the NIH/FDA study.
Implications of a Second Positive XMRV Study
Once we get past the hold period, the publishing of the second XMRV positive paper is likely to change the nature of the debate. Prior to this second positive report, the original Science paper was becoming an outlier study that could be dismissed in light of several published failures to replicate.  With the new replication, the XMRV link to CFS, whatever it may be, will become an ongoing controversy that demands resolution of key issues such as the differences in testing protocols for XMRV as well as the characteristics of patient groups that are tested.

XMRV and the Ottawa 2011 Conference
Our Sept. 2011 biennial conference in Ottawa will devote a full session to XMRV. And we will put together an expert discussion panel representing different points of view about XMRV. This is the kind of scientific forum that we need to constructively address this ongoing research issue.
Fred Friedberg, PhD

Post a Comment

Featured Products From the ProHealth Store
Vitamin D3 Extreme™ Ultra ATP+, Double Strength Mitochondria Ignite™ with NT Factor®

Looking for Vitamins, Herbs and Supplements?
Search the ProHealth Store for Hundreds of Natural Health Products

Article Comments Post a Comment

They weren't "replication" studies
Posted by: oerganix
Jul 31, 2010
None of the Failure to Find studies were actual replication studies and as far as I know, they didn't claim to be, despite pointed efforts to disprove the validity of the original WPI study in Science and force it into "outlier" status. There was a lot of politics behind all those Failure to Find studies, the majority of which have psychiatrists running the show, not virologists; it's obvious that the CDCs Failure to Find study also has politics behind it. Thanks Mr Friedberg, and other scientists, for pointing out the poor scientific rationale behind the delaying tactics of DHHS and CDC. Scientists and doctors everywhere should be outraged that politics is still more important than science, when it comes to ME/CFS.
Reply Reply
Natural Pain Relief Supplements

Featured Products

Ultra ATP+, Double Strength Ultra ATP+, Double Strength
Get energized with malic acid & magnesium
Optimized Curcumin Longvida® Optimized Curcumin Longvida®
Supports Cognition, Memory & Overall Health
Energy NADH™ 12.5mg Energy NADH™ 12.5mg
Improve Energy & Cognitive Function
FibroSleep™ FibroSleep™
The All-in-One Natural Sleep Aid
Ultra EPA  - Fish Oil Ultra EPA - Fish Oil
Ultra concentrated source of essential fish oils

Natural Remedies

Secret Nutrient for Radiant Skin Secret Nutrient for Radiant Skin
Natural Support for Mood, Sleep and Mental Focus? L-theanine Natural Support for Mood, Sleep and Mental Focus? L-theanine
Strontium - The Missing Mineral for Strong Bones Strontium - The Missing Mineral for Strong Bones
Carry a Massage Therapist in Your Pocket Carry a Massage Therapist in Your Pocket
The Surprising Benefits of Probiotics - What You Didn't Know The Surprising Benefits of Probiotics - What You Didn't Know

ProHealth, Inc.
555 Maple Ave
Carpinteria, CA 93013
(800) 366-6056  |  Email

· Become a Wholesaler
· Vendor Inquiries
· Affiliate Program
Credit Card Processing
Be the first to know about new products, special discounts and the latest health news. *New subscribers only

CONNECT WITH US ProHealth on Facebook  ProHealth on Twitter  ProHealth on Pinterest  ProHealth on Google Plus

© 2016 ProHealth, Inc. All rights reserved. Pain Tracker App  |  Store  |  Customer Service  |  Guarantee  |  Privacy  |  Contact Us  |  Library  |  RSS  |  Site Map