Search results

Do they let you know of the edits before they publish? If not, that seems very strange to me to change someone's words in a quote without indicating it and without their approval.

Metabolic brain changes in post-acute COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis of [18F]-FDG-PET findings Izabella Fernanda Bastos Siqueira, Lais Almeida Figueiredo, Camila Emanuele Moreira Fernandes, Leandro Pinheiro Cintra, Glauber Fernandes de Oliveira, Maria Angélica Rios, Ricardo...

I'm not sure about the one in your previous post. I would expect it to be in the BioBank. But maybe that website GeneAtlas doesn't show every variant they tested for whatever reason. For the one that Dibble tested in the BioBank that wasn't tested in DecodeME, maybe that's just a variant that...

I checked the summary stats for the variant from the thesis for SLC25A15, rs7337312, which has the ID 13:40779161:G:A. The p-value for this in DecodeME is 0.713705. Dibble found another novel association in males with the gene PDE10A, with the SNP rs76346913, which has the ID 6:165736174:C:T...

I found this blog post about the difficulties and methods of connecting a variant to a gene: https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/blog/understanding-genetic-links-to-disease-mapping-variants-to-genes Some snippets: Nearest gene So that's why OLFM4 was proposed as the best candidate here. Open...

Oh I agree with all that you said. I meant if the hypothesis is specifically, "if I increase your CRP, that will cause you to be more likely to have ME/CFS". Which admittedly is not accounting for a lot of CRP related hypotheses.

I'm not sure I follow. You've got two identical people, except person A that you know is more likely to have a higher level of CRP than person B on average. If you think that CRP causes ME/CFS, then you'd expect person A to be more likely to have ME/CFS. Person A might also be more likely to...

I'd just say not to put to much stock in such mutations not being genome-wide significant hits because that's quite a high bar to clear. Hopefully, someone who knows how to do it properly digs into the specific mutations. The following is not definitive. I barely know what I'm doing and could...

I think one potential way to find evidence against concepts is a mendelian randomization approach. Not the questionable versions we see pop up here where they just take SNPs associated with eating breakfast or whatever. But the good MR where you take a mutation definitively known to increase or...

That's what makes the natural experiment of the first study above useful. A large portion of the people who didn't take the vaccine didn't take it because they weren't allowed to. I think what they did was more sophisticated, but a crude way to test the effect of vaccine on dementia is just...

A Reddit user's criticism of the study: Link to Reddit Copying the main bulletpoint headings: 1. The reported improvements, while statistically significant, are small and clinically of no significance to patients (MCID not met) 2. The primary endpoint of the study was safety (TEAEs), not...

Isn't it more just indicating that TNF might have nothing to do with ME/CFS? Or is that what you're saying?

We should probably keep in mind that this is a preprint, and it's already surprising how much press it's getting for a preprint. It might be much more widespread when it's published.

The websites are similar too. I assume they're all owned by the same company, or at least affiliated.

Looking for articles in any major US news like CNN or New York Times, but still not seeing anything. Here's a bunch of smaller newspapers around the world publishing about it using the same wire story: Google Search Edit: Direct link to one: Sacramento Sun

Python. I just copied the manhattan plot code from an example I found.

Oh yeah, I should have read the readme file first. It's got all the info that confirms that. @ME/CFS Science Blog you were wondering which SNPs were imputed. The imputed.info.gz file might have that. Also, I noted the issue with the reported frequencies not making sense. The readme says not...

The preprint is now also on medRxiv: Link

It looks like what we want is in the qced.var.gz file. It just has a list of SNPs, which I assume are those that passed QC. When I filter the main summary stats file (gwas_1.regenie.gz) to only include the SNPs in this list, then it looks like it matches the reported data:

Interesting, thanks! This seems like it could be important. They thought preventing the shingles infection was helping prevent dementia, but this is pointing to a specific ingredient found in multiple vaccines instead.