Search results

The study is from Dr. Brian Walitt and his effort preference study with a very small number of patients of whom 4 recovered spontaneously, and what they write there is about mice.

It could also be that it is the other way around and that that applies to some of the comments on this site and not to the comments by the reviewers, or not?

Paul Hwang's WASF3 paper is a n=1 paper though.

Of note for some of the commentators here, the conclusion from the 3 reviewers: “This is not so much a review article as a whole textbook on ME/CFS! It is extremely comprehensive, covers every area of the illness, from clinical features, epidemiology, reactions of the medical profession” and is...

I was asked to comment here because in 2015 I published research on myself in which I used lactate testing to show that the main energy production process in my cells, the aerobic one, is severely impeded. In the article I answer many of the questions that are raised in this thread and I show...

A quick look at their study shows the following: 1. all patients had been hospitalised. 2. High dropout in both treatments groups, only 40 out of 56 (71%) face-to-face, 38 out of 62 (61%) remote completed 75% of the intervention and the follow-up measures yet this was 60 out of 62 (98%) in the...

i It’s so nice to see that one of their advisors is Paul Miller. Must be a great comfort to them.

make “unrefreshing sleep and concentration problems mandatory” the characteristic sleep problem of ME is reversal of the day and night rhythm and I don’t suffer from unrefreshing sleep. You don’t need to have concentration problems and I certainly don’t have them. I have bad cognitive problems...

Will those responsible, ever be held accountable?

Thank you, but I didn’t think it was. That’s very true and as always there is always criticism during the peer review process but also a compliment in the form of “excellent paper”.

No that is not correct. I had challenges because of the severity of my disease but also because it’s an extensive analysis of the Anomalies article.

Thank you for the compliment, much appreciated

Professor Todd Davenport, specialist in exercise physiology, commented on the study’s findings in the following manner: “The analysis is so spot-on. Thank you for getting it out into the world.”

Thank you!

Thank you!

Thank you. I had difficulty finding that sort of literature which shows the problems of GRADE. Can you recommend a good article about that?

Why is GRADE garbage?

In other words you are the exercise physiologist and they are not? “To document and assess PEM in CFS, a 2-day CPET was conducted to measure baseline functional capacity (CPET1) and provoke PEM. Twenty-four hours later, a second CPET assessed changes in related variables, focusing on PEM...

“The 2 day testing protocol is particularly helpful in documenting post-exertional malaise (PEM) and symptom exacerbation following physical activity” https://workwellfoundation.org/testing-for-disability/

The answer is actually pretty simple. If the original article is open access which it is, then a response should also be open access, but sometimes as we have seen before that needs to be pointed out to the (editor of the) journal