Search results

There is a conspicuous disconnect between what the clinics describe and what patients say is happening in the worst cases. Perhaps they really do intend to tailor treatments for everyone, and be supportive, but over the years have started rushing things and getting defensive at patient pushback...

He brought it up, but I pointed out the flaws in the trial and that they dropped objective measures (he'd previously agreed that using actometers was a sensible idea, although it seemed like the idea had never occurred to him before, which is worrying). This seemed to put an end to that, and the...

It is, but NICE clarified that doesn't mean they'll be recommended--just that they'll be included in the evidence. Jonathan also pointed out that narrative summaries of studies aren't suitable in this case, and they seemed to agree. They also agreed that the criticisms and discussions around...

Agreed. They knew the issues. There was surprisingly little to argue about. NICE even acknowledged that criticisms of existing studies would also be borne in mind.

Almost certainly.

This is very exciting! I like Chris more and more, and I'm usually quite sceptical!

He is a different person, but he's still part of the CMRC, if I'm remembering correctly. He's just not on the board. There are two Mark Edwards in the CMRC.

Given that at least two CMRC members are writing papers about ME as a 'functional neurological disorder' (which the abstract confirms is another name for 'conversion disorder' or 'hysteria'), is the CMRC pledge to focus on biomedical research undermined by that approach?

Great news!

Not very well. The only thing I found really strange was his claim he could do so many push-ups. His books claim he inadvertently started drug culture, so I'd expect his life to be otherwise very 'out-there'.

Has anyone seen the pamphlet that he supposedly shares about his treatment?

I take oxytocin. In fact, I'm on pretty much everything he took (magnesium, B12, amitriptyline). Funnily enough, I've also done a lot of my writing lying down! Maybe I should try sleeping in two shifts again. I used to do that. I'd wake up early, get some work done, then sleep a few more hours...

No, I agree. However, if it shows high frequency in, say, any illness with metabolic issues, but those other illnesses have adequate tests already, it's still better than what we have now. For instance, you could use the nanoneedle to prove something is wrong, and then an MRI to decide whether...

But as Ron says, it still shows something is up. That might be enough for now while he explores the other three biomarkers.

As it happens, I'm in a crash at the moment, so I don't think I'll bother with this.

Please!

I wonder which side-effects occurred, and whether those might give us clues. As always, I suspect it's a secondary consequence of CNS disruption, rather than a primary cause.

Could they be the result of a complication of the illness, rather than a cause? I'm also curious if the patients had Sjogren's instead of/as well, as DRGs seem to be present in some complications of that illness too.

But also, might these things not attract different labels? Such as withdrawn boys being labelled with certain kinds of ADHD or similar, while withdrawn girls might get labelled with depression.

I think we'd need some expert opinion to clarify, perhaps?