Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

NIH claims NK cells not different between CLD, recovered patients, and healthy?

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by WillowJ, Jun 23, 2011.

  1. WillowJ

    WillowJ คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl

    Messages:
    3,763
    Likes:
    4,842
    WA, USA
    very small study by NIH (why so small? weren't they interested in what they were doing? they could hardly lack funding)

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2725528/

    It is not evident how they defined recovery ("no symptoms attributed to Lyme disease"; the verbage does not necessarily indicate they were clear of symptoms altogether), and the healthy volunteers are not characterized at all.

    I know nothing of the players in the Lyme politics wars. Are these the Reeves and Wesselys of the Lyme world?

    Or should this be taken as a geniune contradictory result, though in pilot-sized numbers, so not as significant as, say, this study:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11222912

    (extra paragraph breaks added)
     
  2. Chris

    Chris Senior Member

    Messages:
    742
    Likes:
    429
    Victoria, BC
    As I understand it, it is the functionality, or lethality, of NK cells that mark CFS and provide a possible or probable biomarker--ours just don't do the job properly. Rather than simple numbers, which previous studies have shown are inconsistent. Chris
     
  3. WillowJ

    WillowJ คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl

    Messages:
    3,763
    Likes:
    4,842
    WA, USA
    thanks, Chris

    number of total NK cells is normally unchanged in ME/CFS (and I assume also in CLD)... but this is number of cells with a particular marker, which is related to their functionality, if I'm reading the papers correctly... or maybe I'm confused :(
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page