Search results

Despite the fact the article quotes Holloday "at the very least call it chronic fatigue syndrome", somehow the author can't even do that.

In terms of a "CNN hero" you are probably right. This is Jens time of calling, in a year or two Unrest will have passed and it will be yesterday's news. I have a feeling David's work will stand the the test of time but CNN like a story and Jen is more of a story.

Yes, I'd like to know what her thoughts are now. It was interesting that they did show differences between patients and HCs for some tests. Also she mentioned collaboration with Carmen Scheibenbogen in Berlin and being excited about something she is doing.

I wouldn't classify Lipkin, Montoya or Mark Davis in the hero category. They are researchers / doctors doing great work but I don't think i could call them hero's. I would have to put Ron Davis and Maureen Hanson in a similar category, great researchers who I have tremendous respect for and...

I wonder are they aware of Ron Davis recent remarks about storage of samples and how it can impact tests, and whether their storage conditions/ sampling collection procedures facilitate all possible tests, including any newer tests.

I don't follow what you are saying. I don't see anything daft. Just because Montoya isn't an active member of Ron Davis' research group doesn't mean it's daft or we suffer. The concept of sharing equipment also doesn't make sense, and wouldn't impact cost. Someone has to pay for a test...

I notice he is listed in the working group section on the website. I don't know why Dr Davis did not invite him, but I don't think pooling resources has much to do with this study. Everything will come at a cost, I am surprised there are so many people listed, there certainly isn't enough money...

I had the impression Montoya was not involved with Ron Davis' research. Montoya works in a different dept in Stanford and while I think he might have provided patients for research in the past I don't think he was directly involved with OMF / SGTC.

So the question is....how do we get Hr. Radbruch interested in ME. :)

We know now there was no cease and desist letter. I am fairly confident there was no other communication either. The letter reads so badly, they didn't want to admit there was no letter so they dreamt up something else to scare David, and to sound like they were defending Crawley. Either...

:laugh:

After reading this this thread I though this would be a poor article but it is quite good. There are some really valid lines such as : I think we can be far too critical here sometimes. No article will ever be perfect. A lot of the dubious stuff in the article is actually from CDC.

Has anyone invited Mike here ? I met Mike at iime last year, great guy.

Bump :p

I don't know why people are suggesting it's unlikely to be autoimmune.

I think the background is similar, in that cancer patients with ME seemed to recover. However it does have a much broader effect than rtx, so if the problem is in the immune system, just because rtx failed, wouldn't necessarily suggest that cyclo will fail too.

It is due to be published early 2018. I can't speak about the expectations, but clearly the trial investigators believe it has an effect as they extended the original follow up period and then they proceeded with part B. I spoke with one of the investigators at iime and she indicated that it...

Does it exclude b cell involvement? Or could they still be part of this.

At a guess I would say the one closest to you. It's just to avoid you having to pay for a longer distance phone call.

Thanks. General query, do you think the very original responders ( cancer patients) may actually have responded, but to something different in their chemotherapy ? Or any thoughts on this ? It's unlikely placebo played a part in those patients I would say.