Search results

I think all the authors are Bristol or King's. Five of them are on a paper describing a trial of non-pharmacological intervention for fatigue in RA. The first is a physio, the second a professor of nursing at Bristol. I am a bit surprised at John Kirwan getting putting his name to the...

I just checked PubMed on papers relating Growth Hormone levels and responses to exercise. It lists 3,000 papers. Recent papers suggest that interactions are complex. I don't see this as anecdote. I would have thought it was very relevant if we are interested in understanding this study.

I wonder what Simon Wessely thinks of this approach?

I was hooping that you could substantiate your robust denial! I was taught years ago that population studies showed that in communities where women continue to do a lot of physical activity throughout life a Growth Hormone response to stimulus was maintained but in communities where women had...

But, as in the garage analogy, there is likely to come a point where people realise they are being conned. I think there is as much cock-up here as conspiracy.

A lot of them seem to be retired. There also seems to be a push for therapist-led clinics so physicians do not need to be involved so much. It may be that the rehabilitationists will fill the void but rehab has already been closed down once in history.

On what basis? I thought that exercise generated a rise in GH normally and that prolonged inactivity blunted the GH rise in any subsequent activity.

What I see is an interesting change. The Royal Free used to have a physician led CFS clinic that took part in PACE under Gabrielle Murphy. Murphy is at least completely informed of the research background and was on the NICE committee. But this current blurb seems to be written by people who do...

Nit really. I wonder if low growth hormone levels are just a manifestation of limited activity.

It is possible, but since even complete ablation of the pituitary does not usually produce a symptom pattern suggestive of ME and hypothalamic disease also produces quite different pictures I think these findings are pretty hard to interpret.

That site is total gibberish. Something that maybe the discussion on S4ME has not considered too much is that, maybe with the retirement of most of the PACE authors, ME/CFS multidisciplinary services now look as if they are run by people who have no clue at all - even about BPS research...

That really says it all. Physical medicine was dead as a concept in 1975.

They should read what that guy said in the NICE appendix: don't confuse end with means. The end may well be to do more normal activities. That does not mean that the means is to do more normal activities. If you have a leg fracture the end is to walk. You don't get there by walking on a broken leg.

Does anyone understand what is going on here? ELFT were the people who put out a ridiculous video with Rona Moss-Morris on CBT etc. that I think I quoted in my NICE report. It sounds as if they have withdrawn from ME as not part of their core business?

Autoimmunity to hypothalamus or pituitary might be linked to immune response genes like MHC but is not particularly likely to link to genes actually involved in the thyroid (or pituitary).

It has taken me a while to form an opinion on this. I have had some input and I Amin a position to say: My own assessment and that of a knowledgeable colleague suggest that the data are probably not enough to form any useful interpretation. Immunohistochemistry is so subject to artifactual...

Who says that your model has anything to do with the ability to empathise? In my experience those of my colleagues who witter on about psychological and social factors are the least empathising. They think they know the answers rather than being humble with the patient and admitting there are...

It may be relatively hard to find someone completely recovered interested in joining - unless someone with a pet theory of how they recovered. That pet theory is quite unlikely to be about exercise though. The absurdity of the 'inclusivity' may be all the more obvious within. The coincidence is...

That seems an ill-informed comment on various sounds. The whole piece seems scattershot to me. A lot of numbers and not much nuance.

I agree that this recovery business makes a mockery of the whole exercise. Would one have someone who had recovered with homeopathy on a homeopathy review? Or someone who had recovered without homeopathy?