I feel much of the scepticism relates to the fact that this is yet more questionnaire based research, using a convenience sample. There have been many hundreds of papers based on self report questionnaires focusing on this data is rarely illuminating. Personally, I feel It is not the perceptions of patients that are important, but the actual impact and outcomes - actual activity levels of patients, actual employment related outcomes, neuropsychological testing and so on. Then on the medical practitioners side, what was the actual process of diagnosis and treatment do average medical practitioners carry out? Did the practitioners perception of the impact of the disease match the actual impact etc? I do understand that this current survey is simply preliminary research, which is necessary to show there is an effect worth studying, which is in turn necessary for applying for research grants to do a more rigorous study. Interactions with medical professionals is still a potentially interesting area of study, but the key is to study the treating medical professionals and their perceptions at the same time as the patients. That way we can find out the true convergence or divergence of perception and areas where this can be improved. This is one of the real areas which is lacking in medical practise: quality control from the patients perspective. If a medical practitioner does a poor job, the patient will simply go elsewhere, while the practitioner may continue to do a poor job, being unaware of how their patients perceive them. On a related tangent, there is very little research on CFS and ME, when considering the societal disease burden. It is literally of a magnitude of order lower than expected, with predicted funding levels (based on disease burden) at 20+ times what is currently spent. An interesting study would be on the perceptions of researcher both within and outside CFS or ME research and to discover any barriers that are preventing researchers to enter the field.