In een officiŽle verklaring schetsen de medewerkers van het Whittemore-Peterson Institute,
de grote verschillen tussen hun studie (klik hier)
en de XMRV/Wessely-studie (klik hier)
die verklaren waarom het XMRV-virus bij niet ťťn Engelse patiŽnt gevonden werd.
Voor berichtgeving over de XMRV-studie van het Whittemore-Peterson Institute (klik hier).
Official Statement from the Whittemore Peterson Institute Regarding UK Study
2009, 6th of January, 1:00pm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The Whittemore Peterson Institute (WPI) has reviewed the paper entitled
"Failure to Detect the Novel Retrovirus XMRV in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome."
This study did not duplicate the rigorous scientific techniques used by WPI, the National Cancer Institute and the Cleveland Clinic,
therefore it cannot be considered a replication study
nor can the results claim to be anything other than a failure not just to detect XMRV,
but also a failure to suggest meaningful results.
The scientific methods used by WPI are very exact and require specific techniques to ensure accuracy.
Differences in techniques employed by Erlwein et al. not only explain their failure to replicate the WPI study, but also render the conclusions meaningless.
These differences include, but are not limited to the following:
- blood sample volumes and processing;
- patient criteria/population differences;
- number and type of tests done to assure accurate results,
including white blood cell culture;
- use of a molecular plasmid control in water versus a positive blood sample; and
- different primer sequences and amplification protocol used to find the virus,
which were not validated by a clinical control.
Significant and critical questions remain as to the status of patient samples used in the UK study
as those samples may have been confused with fatigued psychiatric patients,
since the UK has relegated "CFS" patients to psychiatric care and not traditional medical practices.