Discussion in 'ME/CFS research' started by adreno, Oct 31, 2017.
Another important one:
Just looking at the something in the blood experiment:
5a and b. Rates of oxygen consumption in a Seahorse analysis - black is healthy controls; red is ME/CFS
5c and d. Rates of lactate production in a Seahorse analysis
5e Calculated descriptors of mitochondrial respiration based on data from 5a.
5f Calculated descriptors of inducible lactate production based on data from 5c.
I'm prepared to believe that there were real differences between the performance of cells after exposure to ME/CFS serum, although the sample size of 12 is small.
But I don't understand the text with its qualification of the finding as applying only to patients with severe disease. Looking at the first paragraph I quoted, there were 6 people out of the 12 with "severe disease". But the analyses are done with the full 12 patients, including 3 with very severe disease and 3 with a level of disease that isn't severe or very severe. What are the authors telling us here? That the three people whose disease is not severe or worse had different results? (Two of the ME/CFS samples did seem to operate in a similar way to the healthy controls - but there's no indication of the severity levels of those samples. ) If that's true, is the serum effect a result of a sedentary lifestyle? Or is the reference to 'severe' in the text just a mistake?
It's interesting that the impact of the ME/CFS serum seemed to increase with exposure time.
Separate names with a comma.