Seems to me that A is not possible, and that B inevitably leads to C.Pick option C, pick option C, pick option C. Said it three times so it must be right.
So, yes, all roads lead to C.
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.
Seems to me that A is not possible, and that B inevitably leads to C.Pick option C, pick option C, pick option C. Said it three times so it must be right.
(not important, more to complete my notes). Just came across the excellent Jason review of PEM which mentions the Lights study used 20 minutes of excercies at a fixed heart rate ie much longer than the 6MWT and also not self-paced.Hi oceanblue, it is well established that capacity is not repeatable on two days running. This discredits the entire basis of the 6MWT as it presumes repeatability. I am referring to the Pacific Labs studies, plus the Lights, plus the possibility that NADPH gives a spot test on fatigue/capacity. The NADPH finding gives us, potentially if it can be validated this way, an easy blood test to replace the exercise testing. It would be nice if Pacific Labs could test this - the first day testing is still required, but the second day would be just a blood test if this is validated. In addition once this measure has been validated (presuming its not a flop) then we can test both severe and very severe patients as well. I think there is a thread on this on PR somewhere (it also relates to mitochondria, oxidative stress and methylation) but here is the paper (which may be dodgy as its from Wichita, I am not sure):
http://www.riordanclinic.org/research/articles/AT-2012-v18.pdf
Furthermore its a condition of ME that we have not just fatigue but fatiguability. Any spontaneous measure is invalidated for ME. They cannot rationally claim that ME is the same as CFS without running into a contradiction unless they also claim that fatiguability is not an issue. Exercise testing has to be a repeat measure.
So to clarify, the 6MWT is only discredited wrt ME and well defined CFS, not for the majority of the population.
A specialist? Who's specialist though? One of those "faulty illness belief" specialists by any chance? Potentially very misleading if it means what I think it means.Patients attending two CFS/ME specialist clinics in London and receiving a diagnosis of CFS/ME from a specialist doctor
"PW [Peter White] has an extension to NIHR RFPB grant regarding GET which includes a qualitative study to look at patients’ views of being offered GET as an intervention and will include those that have and have not benefit from GET as an intervention."
Anyone here happen to save it?I'm afraid the first link that I posted in my previous post is broken. I don't know why, but am chasing it up. It was the first good listing of medical research studies over the last 25+ years, with details and funding. Now it has gone.
http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN22975026On 30/07/2015 the overall trial end date was changed from 31/03/2014 to 01/12/2015.
Very late to add a primary outcome measureAlso:
Added 21/07/2015:
2. Chalder fatigue scale measured at 12 weeks and 1 year
Increasing the sample size can help make a result that's not statistically significant into one that is.On 21/07/2015 the target number of participants was changed from 178 to 218.