• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

CFSAC meeting Oct 3-4, 2012

Hope123

Senior Member
Messages
1,266
Doesn't it sound like a series of vicious circles? We can't get funding because there are not enough proposals, but there's not enough proposals because there's no funding. We can't get a good team of experts evaluating proposals because there's so few researchers that the same people who want to propose research would be the same ones evaluating the research. :thumbdown: But we can't get more researchers into the field if there's no funding.... It just keeps going around and around and around....

Yes, it's vicious circle and the same excuses every year for the past 20 years. If the government wanted to break the cycle, they could.....it's all about will and interest.
 

Seven7

Seven
Messages
3,444
Location
USA
proposal: Does anybody knows how to fill out grands??? we can get a class and volunteer on the centers to request proposals. We can swamp NIH on proposals and something maybe will get approved. I heard the centers are discouraged to do the work. Maybe if we advocates / patients provide the help we have better chance.
 

SpecialK82

Ohio, USA
Messages
993
Location
Ohio, USA
Inester, I'm not sure if I totally understand what you are saying, but I think I agree, lol ;)

I like this idea proposed to us patients by Nancy Lee, I have thought of it often:

- patients go to the NIH website "Office of Extramural Research"
- learn about all of the funding opportunities (this will take awhile, it's complex)
- advocacy community can work with the researchers and partner with people at universities to let them know about funding at the NIH

This is a huge task, but I would love to see us set up and advocacy group to do just that. I would also like us to keep track of each existing research project, source of funding, when data should be published, etc. And then have a complimentary list of funding opportunties, and actually try to match these up to a degree. I know this can get very complicated but we don't need to start from scratch.

We probably could ask for some sort of NIH "class" for us if we really pushed it. At the very least, I would think that the CAA could guide us and give this group some lessons, they deal in that world everyday......
 

Andrew

Senior Member
Messages
2,513
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Yes, it's vicious circle and the same excuses every year for the past 20 years. If the government wanted to break the cycle, they could.....it's all about will and interest.
It's what Mary Ann Fletcher said. She said that researchers stopped applying because they make it extra difficult. She also pointed out that there are nonexperts on the committee. And unless I misunderstood her, she quit the review committee because it was too complicated to get things approved.
 

Hope123

Senior Member
Messages
1,266
It's what Mary Ann Fletcher said. She said that researchers stopped applying because they make it extra difficult. She also pointed out that there are nonexperts on the committee. And unless I misunderstood her, she quit the review committee because it was too complicated to get things approved.

Yes, I hope they listen to her. She has the most CFS research experience of anyone sitting around that table right now even if she is somewhat soft-spoken. I also hope they listen to Dr. Levine, the only truly experienced CFS clinician at the table as far as I know. At least Dr. Dimitrakoff was honest and humble about his expertise in CFS, not so sure about other some other people at the meeting.
 

Hope123

Senior Member
Messages
1,266
Inester, I'm not sure if I totally understand what you are saying, but I think I agree, lol ;)

I like this idea proposed to us patients by Nancy Lee, I have thought of it often:

- patients go to the NIH website "Office of Extramural Research"
- learn about all of the funding opportunities (this will take awhile, it's complex)
- advocacy community can work with the researchers and partner with people at universities to let them know about funding at the NIH

This is a huge task, but I would love to see us set up and advocacy group to do just that. I would also like us to keep track of each existing research project, source of funding, when data should be published, etc. And then have a complimentary list of funding opportunties, and actually try to match these up to a degree. I know this can get very complicated but we don't need to start from scratch.

We probably could ask for some sort of NIH "class" for us if we really pushed it. At the very least, I would think that the CAA could guide us and give this group some lessons, they deal in that world everyday......

I think patients have a role in helping out researchers but having successfully applied for grants in the past, it is a time-consuming complex process that can take months. And you really have to know the science well. Chances of success are around 20% generally (all fields, not just CFS) and scientists are NOT paid for the time they spent writing/ finding collaborators/ filling out forms/ making a budget so they're doing it on their own time, squeezed between work, family time, other obligations.The 80% of grants that don't get funded aren't necessarily bad either; at this level of the game, good ideas get thrown out all the time for lack of funds in all science fields.

The US grants funding process is not very efficient in my mind and was a reason I left academia years ago. It didn't pay well ( the private sector paid me 50% more) and, even if I was willing to get paid less, it was a very unstable way of trying to make a living relative to other opportunities I had. Grants usually last only a few years. In some countries, scientists are given a stipend to live on aside from grants but not the US. I think Dr. Lee is being unrealistic here and putting too much responsibility on the shoulders of sick people. Instead, it should be Dr. Maier's job as ME/CFS Trans-NIH Working Group Director to help researchers find opportunities -- what are we paying them for with our tax dollars?

Patient's biggest bang for their low energy levels might be visiting/ calling/ educating their local Congresspersons about ME/CFS and asking for more funding. A one-time visit doesn't do it; you have to establish a relationship. Best way to get to a politician if you don't have money but have some time and energy -- volunteer for their office/ campaign. Political pressure and getting to know the legislative staff works for other groups.
 

Andrew

Senior Member
Messages
2,513
Location
Los Angeles, USA
At least one speaker made a big deal about activism, and how the autism community did it so all we have to do is duplicate their errors. But what this overlooks is the culture at the CDC, and how is biases the data via selective omission and misrepresentation.
 

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
There was also a lot of noise about how effective activism was. Which meant to say, how far activism fit with the committee speaker's ideas of activism. We have made progress, we are learning, the CAA for example has quite a lot of research it is assisting. Generally though its failing, which was also explained yesterday. If we cannot get more researchers interested, we fail on the research front (which is only one of several advocacy fronts, though the one that leads to a cure and so the most important).

It is clear to me that, aside from misinformation about militancy from the UK media, the primary problem is general attitudes, with a secondary problem of academic attitudes. Several of the committee members (don't recall names) yesterday spoke about funding opportunities for grad students etc. Yes there are opportunities, but the impression out there is there are no opportunities and research in CFS is a career death - some people have directly said that over the years.

To succeed advocacy must do at least four things:

1. Accelerate research.
2. Put a brake on disinformation, including psychologization of ME.
3. Improve medical treatment.
4. Assist patients being abused by the medical or other systems.

We are probably most successful in that order. I do note the ICC treatment primer is now out, so that will help with item 3.

Bye, Alex
 

WillowJ

คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl
Messages
4,940
Location
WA, USA
And I was a little annoyed with the suggestion that ME patients/advocates/doctors get involved with the chronic pain committee or whatever. It's not about pain!

that's kind of six of one, half a dozen of the other to me... chronic pain consortiums tend to be about central senitization, pain focusing, biofeedback, and a lot of such nonpharmacological management which frankly many of us learned on our own and is really the lesser part of our concern. also they tend to be of the type that lumps various conditions together as if they had no significant differences (it's hysterical females, what can you expect)

but on the other hand, anything that is funded and organized that we can sort of join up with and get attention and funding from, that we could use for our priorities, is a good thing to me.

pain is not the defining feature of our disease but it is a prominent one for many of our patients. and any 'chronic pain' budget that names us, I expect we could use for disease biomarkers or whatever.
 

WillowJ

คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl
Messages
4,940
Location
WA, USA
I'm speaking between 4 and 4:15 on Wednesday. And after watching the first round here, I can see some things I could have done better in preparing my speech. But I don't feel like tinkering with it now.

I hope nobody gets mad at me for using the term Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) without adding ME to it. My reason is I am trying to paint a picture about the context in which that name was invented, and what followed the invention of that name.

if I was hearing the right Andrew (I think I recognized your voice) you did well. Thanks :)
 
Messages
15,786
Usual BS about the definition of CFS today, but some panel members did a great job grilling the CDC woman. It's just amazing how nervous some of the CDC and NIH folks are ... that one even dropped her pen after stuttering a bit at the end :)
 

BEG

Senior Member
Messages
1,032
Location
Southeast US
This disability guy is doing an excellent job explaining their position. From one who has gone through the system, take his comments to heart. They are so true. Keep that daily diary and so on.
 
Messages
15,786
This disability guy is doing an excellent job explaining their position. From one who has gone through the system, take his comments to heart. They are so true. Keep that daily diary and so on.

It's weird how little the SSA seems to understand about ME/CFS. Benefits being awarded secondary to "other affective disorders", brain damage, and HIV? Funny how those people are never on the ME forums looking for help with ME symptoms :p He keeps saying "chronic fatigue" and I think he means it.
 
Messages
15,786
Don't forget to put 99.2p on your disability application.

Yeah, I was just reading their description of 99-2p and it looks decent. OI and muscle muscle issues, neurocognitive, etc. But I think they person that suggested we've given up on getting benefits for CFS and go for psych diagnosis instead was probably right.
 

maddietod

Senior Member
Messages
2,859
This disability guy is doing an excellent job explaining their position. From one who has gone through the system, take his comments to heart. They are so true. Keep that daily diary and so on.
BEG, I came in when he was answering questions. Could you give a recap of the comments we should take to heart? Thanks!