This is a copy
the orginal to NOTEBOOK. I insert
the copy here for ease of reference - the idea
being that Nederlog 1012 continues after August with NOTEBOOK, which is
easier to maintain for me, because of the
problems with my eyes that started in May 2012.
in the NYT
is the yield?
Reformatted Sep 19,
with my eyes...but doing a little better than before I reformatted
this file and the
opening pages. Also, I
made a few small corrections in this flle.
And there is a new note
at the end explaining why part of my site
looks pretty awful, for which I am sorry: It's not done on purpose, and
it is also not easy to see.
I surmised and argued, most completely nearly a year ago, which was
exactly two years ago after having read the news XMRV is dead.
was a press conference today, and Dr. Ian Lipkin gave it the coup de
grace, indeed with the consent of dr. Judy Mikovits, who started it all.
brief summary comes to this:
- There is
no relation between XMRV and ME/CFS
- The spurious cause in the 2009 Science paper by Lombardi, Mikovits et
al. was lab-contamination
- Judy Mikovits Ph.D. agrees:
Judy Mikovits Ph.D.:
Dr. Mikovits, the author of the Science paper wherein XMRV was first
linked to CFS: "I greatly appreciated the opportunity to fully
participate in this unprecedented study. Unprecedented because of the
level of collaboration, the integrity of the investigators, and the
commitment of the NIH to provide its considerable resources to the CFS
community for this important study. Although I am disappointed that we
found no association of XMRV/pMLV to CFS, the silver lining is that our
2009 Science report resulted in global awareness of this crippling
disease and has sparked new interest in CFS research. I am dedicated to
continuing to work with leaders in the field of pathogen discovery in
the effort to determine the etiologic agent for CFS."
from professor Ian Lipkin Ph.D.:
promising XMRV and pMLV hypotheses have been excluded, the consequences
early reports linking these viruses to disease are that
new resources and
investigators have been recruited to address the
the CFS/ME", said W. Ian Lipkin, MD, director of the
and John Snow Professor of Epidemiology in the Mailman
Public Health of Columbia University. "We are confident
these investments will yield insights
causes, prevention and treatment of CFS/ME."
David Tuller's article in the NYT
What can I add to that? I add
David Tuller's article in Tne New York Times of today,
as usual with him clear and to the point, except for the title, that I
guess is not his:
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Back to
Chronic fatigue syndrome is not caused by a mouse
retrovirus, according to a study initiated by the National Institutes
of Health to settle what had become a contentious scientific question.
posted online Tuesday in the journal mBio, found no link between the
illness, also called myalgic encephalomyelitis, and mouse leukemia
retroviruses, including one called XMRV. Two earlier studies had
identified higher levels of the viruses in patients with chronic
fatigue syndrome. Later research did not confirm the finding, and
scientists blamed laboratory contamination for the earlier results.
N.I.H. asked Dr. Ian
Lipkin, a virologist at Columbia, to investigate. Dr. Lipkin recruited
in the effort scientists who initially reported the link to mouse
retroviruses, and they serve as authors on the mBio paper.
study, none of the
researchers reported finding mouse leukemia viruses in any of 293 blood
samples, half from people with chronic fatigue syndrome and half from
those without it.
estimated one million
people in the United States have the condition; many are severely
disabled and homebound.
Lipkin said that he
viewed chronic fatigue syndrome as a major illness and intended to use
blood samples he had obtained to investigate the causes.
3. What is the yield?
I'd say this:
As to the media:
ME/CFS got a considerable amount of media exposure mostly due to the Science article in 2009
Appraisak of the media exposure
It is difficult to say what good that did: It put ME/CFS on the map in the media, but after the repeated failures to conifrm the link and the repeated - let's say - not very rational or polite reactions of quite a few patients what might have been positive soon turned sour
Maybe on balance it is positive - on the somewhat cynical view that to get media exposture is better to be known somehow than to have been never heard of
First, scientifically speaking this is definite progress: Science
proceeds by conjectures and refutations, as Sir Karl Raimund
Popper - one of the few philosophers (of science) to get knighted
because of philosophy - never got tired insisting. Besides:
Lipkin succeeded in putting together a database with- I think
hundreds of files with - medical data
of patients with ME/CFS, which is bound to be very useful for
scientific research (while it is odd nobody did this before, in the
last thirty years, as M.E. aka Myalgic Encephalomyelitis has been a
disease recognized by the World Health Organization since some 40 uears
now, and notably not at the U.S. CDC, that wasted tens of millions of
dollars in furthering the late Bill Reeves antics and defamations and
denigrations of patient with ME/CFS, without doing anything useful that
would have contributed to real science or would have been of help to
the patients with M.E. ("First do harm",
seems to have been Bill Reeves basic principle of medical ethics)
Many patients initially were elated that what they naively and
mistakenly assumed to be a scientific causal explanation for ME/CFS had
been found by Lombardi, Mikovits et al. In fact, all that was in fact
found also if it had not been contamination (as Judy
Mikovits Ph.F. now agrees is the real cause of the
findings she got published and defended for nearly 3 years) was a correlation
(as indeed I myself insisted since October 2009).
a few patients defended, argued and mailed the media and researchers
with scientifically unsound ideas that the cause had been found, and
behaved quiite unreasonably - that may be explained by their
having been discriminated for years or decades as mad or as malingerers
by such worthies as the malicious Bill Reeves Ph.D. of the U.S. CDC,
and by psychiatrists such as Simon
Wessely and Michael Sharpe, who claim - totally illogically,
dishonestly and immorally - that psychiatry can explain unexplained
medical diseases, namely as follows: If current medical science has no
complete explanation for a disease - multiple
sclerosis or peptic
ulcers come to mind, about which psychiatrists have argued
likewise, thereby contributing enormous amounts of suffering and
discrimation to millions of genuinely ill honest people
- then .... there is no
and those who claim to be ill must be mad or malingering
and therefore should start paying a ... psychiatrist to
get cured from their delusions that they are physically ill by (forced)
physical exercises and cognitive behavioral therapy to teach them to
think and behave properly, as
And while this line of argument - there are
estimated to be 17 million people with M.E./CFS in the world -
is of very great benefit to psychiatric incomes AND totally
in contradiction with the World Health Organization's classification of
M.E./C.F.S. all psychiatrists and clinical psychologists I have
read who perpetrate this cruel scam decline to discuss their
own financial interest in this pseudoscientific medical fraudulence and
also succeed in never as much as mentioning
the following two facts - and I quote (from Sophia and me, an impressive
site about the life and death of Sophia Mirza, a patient with M.E. who
was severally and cruelly abused by British psychiatists and medical
"WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION
(W.H.O.) DEFINITION OF M.E.
acquired organic, pathophysiological, multi-systemic illness that
occurs in both sporadic and epidemic forms. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
(ICD 10 G93.3), which includes CFS, is classified as a neurological
disease in the World Health Organization's International Classification
of Diseases (ICD). Chronic fatigue must not be confused with ME/CFS
because the "fatigue" of ME/CFS represents pathophysiological
exhaustion and is only one of many symptoms. Compelling research
evidence of physiological and biochemical abnormalities identifies
ME/CFS as a distinct, biological clinical disorder.".
these same psychiatric pseudoscientist
and frauds never mention
to the governments and institutions they do - falsely and
dishonestly - advice about M.E. is this fact:
by the World Health Organization
Dr. B. Saraceno of the WHO had clarified the classification in writing
on October 16, 2001.
“I wish to clarify the situation regarding the classification of
neurasthenia, fatigue syndrome, post-viral fatigue syndrome and benign
myalgic encephalomyelitis. Let me state clearly that the World Health
Organisation (WHO) has not changed its position on these disorders
since the publication of the International Classification of Diseases,
10th Edition in 1992 and version of it during later years.”
“Post-viral fatigue syndrome remains under the
diseases of nervous system as G93.3. Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis
is included within this category.”
“Neurasthenia remains under mental and behavioural disorders as F48.0
and fatigue syndrome (note: not THE CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME) is
included in this category. However, post-viral fatigue syndrome is
explicitly excluded from F48.0.”
Andre l’Hours of the WHO headquarters provided further written
clarification on January 23, 2004.
“This is to confirm that according to the taxonomic principles
governing the Tenth Revision of the World Health Organization’s
International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health
Problems (ICD-10), it is not permitted for the same condition to be
classified to more than one rubric as this would mean that the
individual categories and subcategories were no longer mutually
L’Hours stated that any country that accepts the WHO Regulations for
nomenclature is obligated to accept the ICD classification.
on M.E., the abuse of patients and the scientifically established facts
about M.E. see:
- See also The
Foundation for M.E.'s ME The Medical Facts: Summary
items on my site:
of September 19, 2012 about the appearance of the site
with my eyes have
ongoing for me since the middle of May of 2012. Lately, there is some
relief thanks to Duratears, but it is by no means over. Meanwhile, I
have been trying to keep my site updated, which is far from easy
The site's appearance
at various places got slowly worse because of a combination of factors
(1) I am on Linux
Ubuntu, that I much prefer over MS Windows, for many reasons, but that
has some shortcomings, such as no really good WYSIWYG html-editor. This
also is the case for MS Windows (if you can't afford to pay lots of
money, which holds for me), and I have used various editors until I was
presented with a legal copy of MS Frontpage in 2002, that I mostly used
for the site till 2011. This was less bad than the rest, but not really
good. Also, that runs only on the 32 bits machine I have, that is
itself flaky and quite slow, especially with Frontpage.
(2) The best I could find on Ubuntu for the site that I have -
thousands of html files put together mostly since 1996, when my site
started, comprising at the moment 395 MB is a combination of KompoZer
and of SeaMonkey's editor Composer, from which the former was derived.
Unfortunately, KompoZer is seriously bugged in various ways. One can
write a decent bit of html in it, but when it comes to maintaining a
site like mine, its bugs get easily in the way. SeaMonkey does not have
most of the bugs of KompoZer, but is more limited in its capacities.
(3) Having problems with my eyes, and doing most of my reading of texts
on a computer through a browser, preferably either Firefox or
Seamonkey, since I very much dislke MS I.E., and anyway am limited to
Ubuntu for most things, I tweaked the browsers I use to avoid problems
with my eyes. Notably, I tweaked the size of texts. Unfortunately,
that depends on at least 2 parameters, apart from fonts, and these
parameters are differently handled by different editors and by
(4) The effect of different sizes of fonts again can be overridden to
some extent by increasing the size of the text with the browser, which
again can happen in various ways, that mostly amount to one's not
seeing the original sizes...
So that's how it
happened that I managed to screw up the appearance of parts of my site
- especially in Nederlog, my Philosophical Dictionary, and the opening
of the site, without really seeing it. Besides, what I did see I could
not undo with such eyes as I had through the summer of 2012, that I
spent for a good part in the dark.
Anyway... there still is rather lot to improve, and with the eyes and
the health I have I can make no promises whatsoever, but at least you
have an explanation.
of 23 nov 2012: This has been edited back from earlier versions
that did not display well. I think the text is the same as was, but the
table about M.E. is a better version than was in the original, though
most items are the same.
necessary corrections have to be made later.