Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by Dolphin, Dec 28, 2011.
Couldn't find full text on the net for free (but perhaps some can access it).
Thanks. I don't really understand this part
When i first read the title, i was scared that it's another paper that said "you're alright, don't worry". Interesting that at baseline the values were similar, so it seems you really need to do the repeat challenge, to see something with that kind of testing. 9 subjects is of course a bit small a sample size though, i guess. It would be interesting to always also check some other measures if you put people through such a test, i think. Things like NK cell function, mitochondrial function, cell free DNA or whatever...
I remeber Tessie Tess said some time ago she wanted to make that kind of testing available in Quebec. Maybe she could find some people to help with that where that paper came from...
Hm, wait... Doesn't this contradict what the Pacific Fatigue Lab people have reported
I didn't realize this, when i read the text 10 minutes ago, because i just woke up...
I reckon it's the Ellie Stein study. I read somewhere before (piece by Cort?) that they hadn't replicated the Pacific Fatigue Lab study.
I googled a bit and found this:
In this article about the 2009 IACFS/ME conference Cort mentions the studies that couldn't confirm the Pacific Fatigue Lab's findings.
And i also found this: http://sacfs.asn.au/download/cardio.pdf
It's from 2001, but could still have some interesting information for some.
The MVC bit shows muscle weakness (to an extent) post exertion (as I understand) - but would like to see more info.
http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/86/8/1146.long (about low frequency fatigue)
They do seem to be rejecting the psychological explanations:
And they seem to be suggesting that this sort of testing could be used as a biomarker for ME/CFS:
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.