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, 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.
So they offer the opportunity to their patients to purchase supplements. So does every practice. This is not unusual.
... CAM can treat a wide range of medication conditions from sinus issues to more complex medical issues like Chronic Pain and Fibromyalgia, or infections like Lyme disease, or poorly understood illness such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Many people turn to Alternative Medicine when conventional medicine has failed them, but it does not have to be a last resort. Many people choose alternative care for their primary form of treatment." ...
... "We are exploring many modalities of treatment, and partnering with researchers at UCSD, Stanford University, and the Society of Cannabis Clinicians, along with several groups working to improve collecting and processing patient history and outcome data.
Our most active current research is the Metabolomics Research we are doing in collaboration with Robert Naviaux of UCSD, through the newly established Gordon Medical Research Center." ...
Further under homeopathy many of the supplements listed under this section are just cobinations of what many members already take. Heres an example:
http://www.npscript.com/gordonmedical/ans-cns-oral-spray/VX0002PAR#undefined2
Navaiux's paper, Metabolic features of chronic fatigue syndrome 'The authors declare no conflict of interest"
Hi @Gingergrrl I have a few concerns about Gordon Medical:
I don't dispute what you said re: Gordon Medical and have never been there nor ever had any contact with them nor personal experience. If I do the metabolomics testing, it will be through OMF or Dr. Davis's group at Stanford and solely for my own potential future treatment and not as part of any study. I would not be buying any supplements from them.
I just feel the metabolomics research has great potential for a variety of diseases and if it can be duplicated by different centers, it will be really interesting to see. And if I spend money on the test and am wrong, I am willing to accept that risk. Hope that makes more sense!
another point that I have made in countless threads is:
Mito diseases main symptoms are encephalitis or encephalomylietis
And Encephalitis and Encephalomylietis cause mitochondrial dysfunction
The best response polls on PR seem to be to 2 methods 1. Being LDN 2. Addresding MTHR
If they sell supplements so what.
If they are researching ME and the biological aspects of it than Thank you.
Not trying to get after you @Groggy Doggy. I appreciate your views.
You know I read this and I didn't think twice about it till now. Thanks for pointing this out! No conflict of interest, my foot!And we have been told here on PR by the research collaborators that CFS may not need any radical treatment, instead diet changes and supplements may be enough.
Eric Gordon of Gordon Medical was a co-author of the Navaiux paper. And he has a clinic that advertises that it can treat people with CFS and that uses the metabolomic research and the other people and organisations associated with the research to give the clinic credibility. The clinic sells supplements to treat CFS.
Yes, it seems many practitioners are grasping at straws. Science / serendipity / trail and error, these are what we have to work with.Until we know what ME is a mixture of therapies are used by many practitioners.
I was stunned to see that (small) part of the discussion section of the PNAS paper hawking vitamins as a potential treatment for CFS. In a muddy field where nothing is clear, there is one thing we can be certain of from decades and decades of self-experimentation with supplements: it's the one approach we know doesn't lead to recovery.
Area under the receiver operator characteristic curve analysis showed diagnostic accuracies of 94% [95% confidence interval (CI), 84–100%] in males using eight metabolites and 96% (95% CI, 86–100%) in females using 13 metabolites.