Amatica Patient-centred chronic disease research

I hope that you won't mind me commenting on your results. The first screenshot suggests that Amatica is reporting that your mast cell results are unusual. But, your summary of gene expression only has a single supposedly mast cell-related gene where the expression is barely outside the 95% confidence range. I don't know how many mast cell related genes they tested, but it's hard to see how they decided you have a mast cell issue.

Did you understand the point that if you are sampling thousands of genes supposedly related to these areas of interest, everyone will have something that looks a bit odd. Maybe there is some valid information here, but you need to see what the controls' data looks like n order to work out which bit might be useful. It is likely that each control individual also has some gene expression that is unusual. There could be lots of reasons for the variations, and plenty of them aren't related to ME/CFS pathology, especially with such a low number of controls.
 
Hutan said:
I hope that you won't mind me commenting on your results. The first screenshot suggests that Amatica is reporting that your mast cell results are unusual. But, your summary of gene expression only has a single supposedly mast cell-related gene where the expression is barely outside the 95% confidence range. I don't know how many mast cell related genes they tested, but it's hard to see how they decided you have a mast cell issue.

Did you understand the point that if you are sampling thousands of genes supposedly related to these areas of interest, everyone will have something that looks a bit odd. Maybe there is some valid information here, but you need to see what the controls' data looks like n order to work out which bit might be useful. It is likely that each control individual also has some gene expression that is unusual. There could be lots of reasons for the variations, and plenty of them aren't related to ME/CFS pathology, especially with such a low number of controls.
Click to expand...

Of course, no problem...
Amatica just sent us all the genes to analyze on AI.
We had a panel, a selection... we have the complete analysis now...
interferon 1 problem for me. I don't understand any of it... haha
In two months they'll do a detailed report for each patient.
Anyway, that's their work, interesting for beginners.
 
Last edited:
Hutan said:
Honestly @neophyte32, I think their product is misleading for beginners, and will lead to people incorrectly thinking they have all sorts of answers for their health issues. I'm concerned that it will lead to people taking drugs that won't help them and may harm them.
Click to expand...

Yes, I see what you mean. But their project is only just beginning. When we have 500 patients and the same number in the control group, it might be more useful.

But finding certain aberrant values that perfectly match the symptoms doesn't reveal anything, does it?
One might find that it has no scientific value, of course, but at some point, when you've been bedridden for a year, you want to know what's happening in your body.
The fact, for example, that my angiotensin II level in a blood protein test is at the 99th percentile (50 healthy individuals and hundreds of patients) could be useful to me. But where does this compensatory mechanism come from? I don't know. What to do? Sartans? I have no idea.
But I need answers.
The more I learn, the more I think I'm not even sure there's just one disease, but several, because the symptoms vary enormously from one person to another. There must be subgroups.
These studies, considered too amateurish, still give us some data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom