Lipkin's Monster ME/CFS Study: Microbes, Immunity & Big Data
The Microbe Discovery Project outlines an ambitious new study by top researchers that has collected patient samples, but needs desperately funds to complete the work.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Counter petition to the MEGA petition, brainstorming stage

Discussion in 'Petitions' started by AndyPR, Sep 29, 2016.

  1. TiredSam

    TiredSam The wise nematode hibernates

    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes:
    21,538
    Germany
    Who else do we know who avoids getting "tied up in the detail" at all costs?

    Oh that's right, our old pal Sir Simon, who Holgate asked for advice on appointments. Maybe he'll be asking him for advice on how to avoid details too - who better?
     
    Snowdrop, Jan, Countrygirl and 8 others like this.
  2. TiredSam

    TiredSam The wise nematode hibernates

    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes:
    21,538
    Germany
    And who else do we know who writes as if they've swallowed a dictionary in order to mask the fact that their text is completely devoid of content? Ah yes, Peter White, who it is proposed will be joining Sir Simon in that shadowy advisory land behind the scenes.

    I wonder if there is much point in trying to clarify a misunderstanding with people whose sole mission seems to be to perpetuate one?

    An Esther Crawley fatigue study - no thanks. Now that PACE looks like crumbling, why should these charletans get to arrange a free ride on the coat-tails of real scientists?
     
    joeblow604, Snowdrop, Jan and 12 others like this.
  3. Aurator

    Aurator Senior Member

    Messages:
    625
    Likes:
    3,077
    "Hypothesis-free research", eh. Does he really mean that, I wonder, or does he mean research where the hypothesis is not explicitly stated?

    Since there is in practice no such thing as hypothesis-free data even, how can there be hypothesis-free research?

    Perhaps Professor Holgate could explain what he means.
     
    Snowdrop, Jan, flybro and 1 other person like this.
  4. Chrisb

    Chrisb Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes:
    5,358
    It is probably best to wait for the substantive response before we get too judgmental. Things don't look promising but this is just one of those messages to adopt a holding position and buy a little time. They can sometimes be expressed in unintentionally unhelpful terms.
     
    snowathlete and TiredSam like this.
  5. trishrhymes

    trishrhymes Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes:
    17,871
    I think we should give him a chance to come up with more detail before we jump to conclusions on the basis of a few words.

    Maybe he's only heard about some people's confusion between hypothesis free studies (like Naviaux and Ron Davis are doing where you look for patterns in lots of biological data to try to help understand a disease) and clinical trials of treatments.

    He may not be aware (yet) about why we are concerned that they are treating White and Crawley as experts.
     
    daisybell, Cheshire and TiredSam like this.
  6. Simon

    Simon

    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes:
    14,549
    Monmouth, UK
    So, yes, I agree we need a lot more information to remove the problems of misunderstanding - and that's down to MEGA. Clearly they haven't explained adequately to date.

    But hypothesis-free does have a clear meaning (Ron Davis talked about at the IiME conference). Normally you have a hypothesis before doing a study eg X causes Y.

    With hypothesis-free approaches, such as MEGA plan and Ron Davis used in his OMF study, you just look to see what's there, usually in great detail. What's happening at the metabolic level, what's going on with gene expression, proteins and what genes are linked with a disease. You can still find out a ton of important stuff (and can make unrelated findings in the same study) but you don't really know what you will find before you start.

    As Ron Davis said, he hoped the IOM group he served on, that reviewed 9,000 studies, would throw up a lot of useful data that would inform new hypotheses. But he said there was precious little data out there, so he had to generate his own - hence the OMF big data study.

    Ron D criticised the NIH for not funding hypothesis-free studies. He said that makes sense when you already know a lot about a disease, but when you know so little, you just need to go out and look in detail to see what's going on, so you can then generate/test new hypotheses eg this pathway came up as really important in our study - lets now zoom in on this in a smaller more focused study to confirm/refute the finding.
     
  7. thegodofpleasure

    thegodofpleasure Player in a Greek Tragedy

    Messages:
    202
    Likes:
    398
    Matlock, Derbyshire, Uk
    There's virtually no chance at all that he isn't aware of that.
     
  8. Simon

    Simon

    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes:
    14,549
    Monmouth, UK
    Sorry, that was a bit unfair, and I'd like to withdraw it. 'knee-jerk' was my own knee-jerk reaction to your unsubstantiated comment MEGA would not include anyone with PEM (assertions are my personal bugbear, but still).

    It's a good point as I said (sorry I credited someone else for that - I have limited energy and haven't been able to keep up with everything on every single thread).

    We don't have any feel for that. We know that many thousands a year new patients pass through NHS clinics every year - I'm assuming that these are the ones that will be recruited by MEGA since they are already being screened/diagnosed. Some will have been ill for a long time, some for much shorter (I'm sure there's data on this somewhere). The clinics do offer treatment (yes, they may be ineffective, but that information won't have reached many patient and like I said, thousands of new patients attend NHS clinics every year). Pacing isn't a cure, as we all know, so I'm not sure that alone is a reason for patients not to attend.

    See above, new patients coming through, not necessarily new cases.

    I hope MEGA appreciate that now; I assume it wasn't their intention.

    Agreed, and I didn't say there was. My point would be that that's where we are. Stephen Holgate has always advocated for a broad church approach, and always for a huge, omics-based biomedical study focused on understanding the biology. I still think is an incredibly valuable approach, not withstanding that MEGA has communicated poorly with patients so far.
     
    aimossy and Wildcat like this.
  9. slysaint

    slysaint Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,124
    Likes:
    11,464
    Isn't this what Dr Naviaux is about to start doing?

    So are the MEGA team also going to recruit patients with all of the above to study as well or are they part of the 12000 that will be recruited from NHS clinics?
     
    Snowdrop and TiredSam like this.
  10. eafw

    eafw Senior Member

    Messages:
    816
    Likes:
    3,397
    UK
    This doesn't bode well. The three most pro-BPS people at the CMRC are the ones making the decisions that will have the worst consequences for us, and are effectively blocking any serious conversation with the proper scientists.

    Well, we do need to wait and see what his follow-up is but, oh dear. Lowly patients failing to understand "complex reasoning" is not what the problem is here.
     
    Cornishbird, Jo Best, Wildcat and 6 others like this.
  11. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes:
    9,863
    Maybe he should be reminded that it was the patients who spotted all the flaws in 'the now discredited' PACE trial, long before anyone else, including all the trial designers and peer reviewers.

    In fact we would only be too happy to be MEGA advisors if he would like to avoid a repeat of PACE.
     
    Cornishbird, Jo Best, Wildcat and 5 others like this.
  12. Aurator

    Aurator Senior Member

    Messages:
    625
    Likes:
    3,077
    Thanks for putting some flesh on the bones. Helpful.
    Let's hope then that the money available will be enough to produce meaningful data obtained on a broad enough front to exclude even the possibility that hypothesis-driven bias may have operated. It's one thing having raw data: it's another matter entirely what that data consists of and what conclusions you're entitled to draw from it.

    Did someone say there was going to be £250 per patient? Or was it £25? If it's the latter, it may not be hypothesis-free research we end up getting, but rather research-free hypothesis, which PACE has given us so much of already, at significant cost, and I don't just mean economic.
     
    Jan, TiredSam and Simon like this.
  13. Simon

    Simon

    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes:
    14,549
    Monmouth, UK
    That's important - with a warehouse full of data there will inevitably be loads of false positives. But that's a well-known issue in omics research now (George Davey Smith was one of those who highlighted the problem) and a lot of work goes into dealing with this. Basically you don't use p<0.05, but p<0.0000x, though there's more to it than that - eg you look for eg findings of the same pathways to be flagged up by eg genomics and metabolomics, which you wouldn't expect to happen by chance.

    I don't know where the budget figures come from, but the CMRC have already said (minutes) that first stage is to get the funds for sample collection. The second stage is the omics work. So I don't think we know the budget. But a bunch of omics researchers won't be signing up for a study with no chance of gettingi the money to do omics.
     
  14. A.B.

    A.B. Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,751
    Likes:
    23,191
    Okay, this sounds more reasonable now. A study of this kind is going to need in depth testing or it will find nothing that could really distinguish between subgroups.
     
    Simon and Snowdrop like this.
  15. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes:
    9,863
    Didn't White once complain about patients obsessing over detail ? ( cant remember when and where but i think it was in relation to the PACE data release)
    Maybe we could remind the CMRC about that and suggest they let us at it ?
    Seeing as their esteemed advisor recognises how good we are at it.
     
    Cornishbird, Jo Best, Jan and 3 others like this.
  16. Jan

    Jan Senior Member

    Messages:
    398
    Likes:
    2,701
    Devon UK
    Hang on a minute, you tell him the ME community has serious concerns, shouldn't his answer have been 'what are the concerns'?
     
    Cheshire, Jo Best, Valentijn and 5 others like this.
  17. Sidereal

    Sidereal Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes:
    17,176
    They probably read PR.
     
    Chrisb, Valentijn, halcyon and 5 others like this.
  18. AndyPR

    AndyPR Senior Member

    Nope, apparently he knows what THE concern is and they will get back to us and explain it in small, easy to understand words that thicky patients like us will be able to comprehend.
     
  19. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes:
    9,863
    C'mon how could our concerns be legitimate ?
    It's obviously a misunderstanding, one that's easily cleared up by an obnoxious and condecending reply.
     
    Jo Best, Valentijn, flybro and 4 others like this.
  20. Jan

    Jan Senior Member

    Messages:
    398
    Likes:
    2,701
    Devon UK
    Then they should know we know the difference between dialogue and monologue.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2016

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page