XMRV papers on hold

We're going to have to wait to see the results of the latest XMRV studies.

Last week, the FDA and NIH announced that they had independently confirmed the Whittemore Peterson Institute's original findings linking ME/CFS with the retrovirus XMRV. And there was much rejoicing among all of us who hope the link will lead to treatment, even a cure someday.

The CDC had also wrapped up an XMRV study. Though they didn't officially announce their results, CFS Central reported that they were negative. Disappointing, but not surprising to anyone familiar with the history. The CDC defines ME/CFS very broadly, and their research likely includes patients who don't actually have the disease.

There was nothing to do but wait for the release of both studies. Then we could examine the methodology and draw conclusions about the discrepancies.

According to the Wall Street Journal, however, both reports are being held from publication.

Kuan-Teh Jeang, editor-in-chief of Retrovirology, said the Switzer paper went through peer review and was accepted for publication when he got a call from the authors earlier this month. They asked that the Retrovirology paper be held.

"My understanding was HHS [Department of Health and Human Services] wanted to get it straightened out. Both reports are from different branches of the government," Dr. Jeang said.

In an email between scientists familiar with the situation, viewed by the Wall Street Journal, a researcher said the two teams were asked to put their papers on hold because senior public-health officials wanted to see consensus—or at least an explanation of how and why the papers reached different conclusions, said the people familiar with the situation.

Entire article here.

I don't want to don the tinfoil hat and immediately call shenanigans. I do want to know what's going on. Both of these papers were peer-reviewed; both were accepted by their respective journals. For the government to suddenly step in and suppress the results is a little bizarre, and it makes me nervous.

A libertarian analysis of copyright

Interesting post up on Human Advancement about what copyright should be.

It is immoral to try to make money from another's work at the expense of sales by the original author, but this does not preclude all copying nor distribution as immoral.

It is immoral, and ultimately self-destructive, to always seek value for nothing.

Enforcement of any of this is immoral, both by the above, and because enforcement in any but small numbers of edge cases, is not possible without prior restraint or a requirement to prove innocence. Social sanctions are the only way to discipline behavior toward those principles, and that relies on how people evaluate the behaviors. [Emphasis mine.]

Entire essay is here. Read it. It's good.

I agree with all of the sentiments. I've repeatedly stated that I oppose draconian punishments for filesharing. I also oppose any punishment for limited filesharing—say, e-mailing a song to your friend because you think she'd like it.

On the other hand, I don't believe social sanctions alone will stop abusive sharing. They are mightily powerful if you happen to live in an Amish community or a small tribe with little meaningful connection to the outside world. They're not so powerful if your society enables easy hops to different social circles.

For social sanctions to work, a significant majority needs to disapprove of the bad behavior in question. Saying that's what should happen won't make it happen.

If I come up with some brilliant idea to make it happen, you'll be the first to know.

All my goodness has turned to badness

Does anybody remember a cheesy '80s song called "Obsession"?

I admit it, I like the song. It's catchy, it's fun, it's good to dance to. But it's dumb. Take this snippet:

My fantasy has turned to madness
And all my goodness has turned to badness

Nothing I can add to that, really.

I never would have thought anything could make "Obsession" goofier—until I saw the video.



Though I came of age when MTV emerged as a cultural force (and, you know, actually played videos), my family didn't get cable. I missed a lot. So today I filled in a bit of my pop culture past. I found "Obsession" on YouTube and watched it for the first time.

Oh. My. God.

First of all, you can't do a tune about unrequited passion as a duet. It doesn't make sense. This is a fundamental problem with the song itself, I grant you, but the visuals make it even more obvious.

Second, there's ... oh, hell. Pretty much everything else. The dance moves by the lead singers, which looked as though they were choreographed and performed by twelve-year-olds. The guy who kept raising his eyebrow at random intervals. The expression on the male singer's face as he lip-synched "All my goodness has turned to badness."

If I had seen this at age 16, when "Obsession" was released, I wonder what my reaction would have been.

Yes, I probably would have found it cheesy and kinda stupid. But I don't think I would have realized how indistinguishable it was from parody. That's just what videos were back then.

I blame my lack of discernment on my youth. Then again, the people involved in the production of this thing were all adults. What on earth were they thinking?

I wonder what we'll say "what were they thinking" about 20 or 30 years in the future.

Replication!

Well well. We have a positive replication study.

For those of you just tuning in, the Whittemore Peterson Institute discovered a link last year between ME/CFS and a retrovirus called XMRV. Their study was published in Science on October 8, 2009.

Subsequent research teams failed to replicate the WPI's findings. WPI (and anyone who gave more than a cursory glance to the research) argued that these weren't true replication studies. For an accurate test of the results, they needed to use the same methodology and the same patient cohort.

Today, the FDA and NIH announced that they have independently confirmed the WPI's original findings. Their press release is here.

Hop onto Hillary Johnson's blog for some excellent insider information.

I look forward to learning more about the actual study, yet to be published. In the meantime, this is a lovely bit of good news to brighten an otherwise ordinary day.

10 Tips for Songwriters

Ta da! Tom Slatter's 10 Tips for Songwriters is now available. The free ebook contains 10 tips from 18 different songwriters. My contribution is on page 13.

It's fun to read a bunch of these in one sitting. Different songwriters can have very different perspectives. In fact, advice from one songwriter will often directly contradict advice from another. I think this makes the book more useful. Read the entire thing, and you're bound to find something that resonates with the way you work.

Those of you who pursue creative endeavors but don't write songs should take a look too. If nothing else, it's interesting to get a glimpse into various songwriting brains.

Cattus interruptus

A few months ago, Ron the Drummer and his wife adopted a kitten. Unlike their other two cats, who are pretty mellow, Abby enjoys getting into everything and she knows no fear. Whatever the size or shape of the object, she looks at it and thinks, "I could climb that."

Also unlike the other cats, Abby has no problem being in the same room as Ron and me when we rehearse. The loudness doesn't faze her a bit.

It's made for some interesting rehearsals. As Ron and I practice, Abby will wind her way around the room, searching for some kind of trouble to get into. Sometimes she chews the cords or plays with the equipment. One time she attempted to climb a table lamp and knocked it over. The trick for us is knowing when to keep playing and when to stop what we're doing to prevent her from breaking something or hurting herself.

Today she wandered over to where I was sitting and gazed up at me with her patented "I could climb that" stare. Sure enough, a few measures before the song ended, she hopped up onto my lap.

I'm proud to say that I didn't miss a note. I finished the song with a cat on me.

In a way, it's good practice. At atmosphere gigs we have to ignore all manner of noises and distractions. If we can play through our own cattuccino machine, we can play through anything.

Memorizing

I spent a good part of practice tonight running through our newest song, trying to get the lyrics down.

Funny thing. When you embark on a songwriting career, nobody ever tells you that you'll have to work almost as hard at memorizing your own lyrics as you would anyone else's.