Tricia Pendergrast et al on housebound versus non-housebound ME-patients. Study correctly described?

I've tried reading this article but I stopped half way when it said:
That suggested, though, which simply as with certain instances regarding Planting pots, the considerate nervous system activation found may well be a compensatory, not pathological, reaction to the disease.
Click to expand...
I assume the Planting pots are an odd artefact of Google translate. I can't make any sense of the article.

Edit - or was the whole thing written by a computer program. The next sentence mentions botox injections.

And now it's just getting silly:
It’s Wyller’s most recent examine, nevertheless, that can take your ex straight into entirely brand new floor. For you to his credit, he’s enabling the information to lead your pet in which it’s going to.
Click to expand...
 
Sly Saint said:
Another Article:
The Advancement of your Long-term Exhaustion Affliction (ME/CFS) Researcher? CBT Follower Requires A lot more
Click to expand...
Actually this article appears to be a mangled version of this one, from last June,
The Evolution of a Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) Researcher? CBT Proponent Calls for More Herpesvirus Research

At times Dr. Wyller of Oslo University has seemed more like a Norwegian version of Simon Wessely than anything else. He’s shown that biological issues were present in ME/CFS, but always manages to come back to the psychological or behavioral elements he believes are perpetuating the disease. His new research, however, is taking him in another direction.
Click to expand...
http://simmaronresearch.com/2017/06...activation-in-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-mecfs/

The paper was published in September of last year (and discussed at the other place):

PLoS One. 2017 Sep 7;12(9):e0184325. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184325. eCollection 2017.Altered right anterior insular connectivity and loss of associated functions in adolescent chronic fatigue syndrome.
Wortinger LA1,2, Glenne Øie M2,3, Endestad T2, Bruun Wyller V1.
Impairments in cognition, pain intolerance, and physical inactivity characterize adolescent chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), yet little is known about its neurobiology. The right dorsal anterior insular (dAI) connectivity of the salience network provides a motivational context to stimuli. In this study, we examined regional functional connectivity (FC) patterns of the right dAI in adolescent CFS patients and healthy participants. Eighteen adolescent patients with CFS and 18 aged-matched healthy adolescent control participants underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. The right dAI region of interest was examined in a seed-to-voxel resting-state FC analysis using SPM and CONN toolbox. Relative to healthy adolescents, CFS patients demonstrated reduced FC of the right dAI to the right posterior parietal cortex (PPC) node of the central executive network. The decreased FC of the right dAI-PPC might indicate impaired cognitive control development in adolescent CFS. Immature FC of the right dAI-PPC in patients also lacked associations with three known functional domains: cognition, pain and physical activity, which were observed in the healthy group. These results suggest a distinct biological signature of adolescent CFS and might represent a fundamental role of the dAI in motivated behavior.
Click to expand...
 
Esther12 said:
I'm amazed that there are still people who want to try to defend PACE without engaging in any of the details of the debate. It's so odd to me.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all amazed. Wyller's intended audience is not us, it is those in charge of making health policy and medical decisions. It is the perfect reply for that audience - an authorative "top scientists disagree", nothing to see here move along. If he engages with the details, they will go, "hang on" and get confused. He is relying on such people to not even bother looking at the details - which is the norm by the way - most authorities don't bother.
 
Snow Leopard said:
I'm not at all amazed. Wyller's intended audience is not us, it is those in charge of making health policy and medical decisions. It is the perfect reply for that audience - an authorative "top scientists disagree", nothing to see here move along. If he engages with the details, they will go, "hang on" and get confused. He is relying on such people to not even bother looking at the details - which is the norm by the way - most authorities don't bother.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can see that from a propaganda perspective, but what I meant is that now we also have authority figures criticising PACE, being on the wrong side of the argument seems more likely to harm one's own career in the long-run, so failing to engage with the details of the debate seems much more personally risky. Wyller wasn't tied to PACE in the way some were (although there are separate problems with his own work), so for him to now put forth such a weak defence of PACE seems likely to be self-defeating for him in the near future.
 
Esther12 said:
Yeah, I can see that from a propaganda perspective, but what I meant is that now we also have authority figures criticising PACE, being on the wrong side of the argument seems more likely to harm one's own career in the long-run, so failing to engage with the details of the debate seems much more personally risky. Wyller wasn't tied to PACE in the way some were (although there are separate problems with his own work), so for him to now put forth such a weak defence of PACE seems likely to be self-defeating for him in the near future.
Click to expand...

Well he's defending it because he is still a true believer.
 
Ah, Snowy, your cynicism is coming along nicely. You will make a fine old curmudgeon. :thumbup:

Esther12 said:
now we also have authority figures criticising PACE, being on the wrong side of the argument seems more likely to harm one's own career in the long-run, so failing to engage with the details of the debate seems much more personally risky.
Click to expand...
This is a good point to get to, where the risks for the still uncommitted of throwing their lot in with an existing school/faction/theory are becoming obvious and well-known.

Nobody likes backing a loser, especially if it could wreck your career and income.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom