Search results

If it's a stage in ageing, it implies that older people will consistently have lower counts - but the article didn't go into detail so my assumption there might be incorrect.

But I thought that dara was shown to potentially work only in those with high levels of NK cells? (Could have got that wrong.)

I have just been reading this article, 'Ageing, fast and slow', from the 12 July 2025 issue of New Scientist. It presents evidence and argument (that I'm in no place to judge) that we don't age linearly but in bursts - that there is '... mounting evidence that , in multiple areas and systems of...

I have just read in this article in the New Scientist (paywalled, sorry, I've got the paper version, no references given) that '...some key immune system cells, including B cells, T cells and natural killer cells, experience two bursts of decline and ageing around the ages of 40 and 65, probably...

Possible AI cobblers from Google but the timeframe maybe fits?

This is why I think we should say 'medical care'.

I find that final line simply confusing, since it doesn't say what sort of help we want - and leaves us open to BACME 'helping' us, or to them claiming that they already are.

I was arm-wavingly trying to convey whatever cut-off we believe to be the case, from the epidemiology/folklore, where being young seems to help you recover. I don't know whether there's some kind of recovery-rate drop-off at puberty and my impression has been that you still have a much better...

I'd say not, because 'them' clearly relates to the most recent plural noun, which is 'treatments'. I'd stick with 'it has'.

I think this could be death by a thousand cuts, where we just pile on one more thing, and one more thing. It already feels baggy to me to add that on (sorry!). There are so many things that we could say about how awful and important it is and about why people should care, but the more we say...

I agree, which is why I mentioned medical care (particularly with the whole refusal of tube-feeding as the extreme case). It can but it's too broad. People could easily interpret it as needing psychological support, or just moral support.

Wondering if we need to be more specific about what sort of support we want because - well, you know. What about, 'We need medical care until then'?

The more detail you add, the less impact the statement will have. I wouldn't add anything else.

I agree, that's exactly what we want our charities, governments, doctors and healthcare systems to be saying. It shouldn't be so hard for them to do it but it will involve both humility and being able to accept their own discomfort about not being able to offer more.

Thanks! Just captured some quotes from that, some of the very prescient of where we seem to be theorywise at the moment.

Right back at you - a good question! :thumbup:

Can't believe it never occurred to me to ask this question before! Does it tell us anything about mechanism?

What about a seminar on the overlap between ME/CFS and Covid? It's weird that Covid research seems epic in its disregard for the ME/CFS subcohort.

How about something on the epidemiology of ME/CFS? When we were doing the 'Intro to ME/CFS' factsheet, the absence of basic facts about ME/CFS was striking - how many people have got it, recover from it, die from it, are housebound, are bedbound, are in the 'very severe' category, timecourse...

Thank you for bringing in all these new people! Is there anything that you think that they and the other new people you've been trying to bring on board would be interested in having a seminar on? Also, could an interested clinician set up an NHS clinic off their own bat or does it have to be...