Search results

Thank you

Are you going to tweet that? If not, can I? It was an excellent answer which he should be told

More than oxalat/spinach, as I read, you should have carbs at the same time, and also daily vitamin B1,B2,B3 and Alpha Lipoid Acid, ALA as much as 1200mg. 100 gram spinach is not so much I think, I have eaten that before. Maybe the vitamins can make a difference? It is kind of hard to...

When i say battle, I mean quarrel/war, not discussion. (English is not my mother language) If he wanted discussion/debate, he would not use the words he is using (either. In addition to not be here debating) That’s true.

Mr. «published researcher» wants to have a battle. I think maybe he deliberately quote strategist because he knows now that strategist is not on Twitter.

@ME/CFS There are some conferences about biomedicine and ME/CFS Do you plan to go, or are interested in these?

What I also wonder, are there any adverse effects? I can’t remember any side effects reported in the articles.

Thank you! now I finally get it right. Couldn’t understand that I got a number outside the interval from 0 to 1. This helps. And getting it from author, is even better. Quite complicated math/statistics, or perhaps a sign of that I have been away from math and physics for a long time. Maybe...

I don’t think it’s the same person, either. But DCA have been discussed in the thread you are referring to. I was really impressed that it seemed like Dr. Comhaire was here as @ME/CFS Though he hasn’t been here since January. But if he comes along, I really don’t understand the formula for...

Don’t you talk about different things? KPAX002 is not the same thing as DCA

I am really skeptical about this formula for who will be responding . The probability of positive response (p) can be calculated using the formula: logit(p) = 11.87 + 0.330 (duration of disease) − 2.958 (FSS before treatment) + 18.894 (item4) − 18.381 (item7) (Fig. 2). I can’t understand that...

There is development (I quarreled a bit with Morgenbladet). But I don’t like to write so much here, since everybody can read. Probably we can report with an answer in Morgenbladet here soon.

Morgenbladet didn’t fancy what I wrote, they thinks there is nothing unfair with Gundersen text. So when I was critical, they meant I was unjust. Not happy about Morgenbladet.

In a dicussion on Gundersens FB, i made the point that PACE authors have used more than £ 100 000 for not giving out raw data. I have read it somewhere, but don’t remember where. Can anybody help me? Edit : found it

I am not sure. We have some excellent answers in the pipeline, see how that goes first.

Both me And Trude wrote about the flaws of PACE, the changed outcome so that people could be sick enough to enter and at the same time recovered, and other main things. Gundersen says in his answer that he disagree. With no explanation at all. Is there a word for that? Reject science because he...

People like Gundersen likes to set and controls the debate. And are used to get their way in things. Think of themselves as superior. The text proves it too. He started a topic/debate and used ME as an example. But then he was unexpectedly used as an example in another topic, “Strong opinions...

It is my opinion that Gundersen would never ever be interested. He thinks of us as lower species, and we should have enough self respect to not invite people who thinks himself so much superior. Answer is coming up.

Is it right to say Gundersen is being polemic? I kind of think so.