Search results

You would not necessarily get something odd, or anything that can be discussed besides "there are many metabolites we can't identify or quantify". When data is shared it might be possible for others to help identify/make sense of the peaks, but it is simply not always possible (and data sharing...

Agreed.

I want to point out they have been rebutted several times ;) But misinformation stays around, for example Wyller did not get funding for an LP study some years ago, and his boss wrote an opinion piece about how the funding body was biased. The funding body in question (Forskningsrådet) wrote a...

While many molecules have easily identifiable signatures/peaks this is not true for all, and even for those that have these easily identifiable peaks noise in the data can make it difficult. Look at untargeted metabolomics studies and there will e a number of unknown metabolites. For targetted...

This was brought up in the complaints to REK/NEM. Some of the replies Forsmo gave made me unsure if she had read the complaints at all, Kielland told her she was wrong on more than one account (we have data of people worsening from LP, patients have been pressured by NAV to undergo treatment...

Finding a peak doesn't mean one is able to identify the metabolite that belongs to the peak (talking metabolomics).

Anne Kielland from Tjenesten og MEg talked about how recruiting participants for the study from NAV (Norwegian Welfare and Labor Administration), and wrote this short recap on fb after (google translated): Kielland and Agledahl (leader of NEM and part of the minority that did not give the...

The project will be discussed in one of the largest news programs in Norway today, and I saw that Kielland from TjenestenogMEg is joining. That gives me some hope for the discussion! The two others will be the leader of NEM (part of the minority) and Siri Forsmo (part of the majority, she is...

Khrono has written about the verdict today, and not surprisingly they miss the point about objective outcomes when doing an unblinded trial and refuse to engage with the criticism but rather complain about how the system has worked against them. Etter avslag i fjor har omstridt ME-forskning nå...

It does look a little bit like it.

Cool!

I've given up on wet lab, it's not just being in the lab at fixed times, but also the light/sound/smells. Obviously labs and what one work with are different, but I have only been in one small lab that would not be too much sensory input.

While I want this to be true, I've noticed a lot of backlash around online (or even hybrid!) teaching. But also seeing/hearing the "it's the results, not the time that's important", which has been true for me.

What's frustrating with metabolomics studies is that (in no particular order) 1) the metabolites are mostly (all studies on pwME?) from blood, while metabolites could be different in tissues 2) they don't account for participants' diet 3) pwME could be in various states of PEM (and have various...

I'm testing out data science/informatics, and would like to see if I'm able to do online nutrition councelling at some point. Working from a computer with the ability to work from home is key to me at this timepoint.

Well, they are required to send the information they give to participants to REK. With NICE guidelines being the newest/most updated on how to handle ME, when they are required to provide updated information to participants re harms etc., will they mention these guidelines recommend against LP...

NEM also asks for the preregistration of the study to be done well. As we know, the preregistration is moot if the final trial reporting consists of other things (which there are examples of in the studies performed by some of the people involved in the LP study).

I noticed the google translated version said none on the board were incompetent, this is a translation error from the Norwegian "inhabil" which means none had conflict of interest.

The verdict from the national ethic's board came today. Short version: The National ethic's board has given the study approval, and it will go ahead. The whole verdict can be read HERE (google translated) A minority on the board did not agree with the soundness of the project I am gutted...

In Fluge and Mella the issue was epigenetic, and that is outside the scope of a GWAS.