tinacarroll27
Senior Member
- Messages
- 254
- Location
- UK
Just been to the lightening process website and it's quoting ME Association survey as an endorsement of the lightening process. This is what it says
'
ME Association’s 2010 Survey
‘Greatly improved’
This survey compares the benefits of a number of different approaches to CFS/ME and includes statistics on the benefits of the Lightning Process.
The ME association’s survey found that the Lightning Process came top of their poll for approaches that ‘greatly improved’ the symptoms of ME/CFS.The Lightning Process received the highest percentage out of all the 25 approaches for those feeling they had ‘greatly improved’ with 25.7%. The next closest was 14.8% for modafinil/provigil (a stimulant/analeptic). Another 18.8% felt the LP had helped them improve (totalling 44.5%).
CBT, being one of the mainstays of NHS approaches to this illness is useful as a yardstick 2.8% ‘greatly improved’, 23.1% ‘improved’.
The fact that the leading ME charity is assessing how well clients did by using the Lightning Process for their ME, and found it was rated as the most helpful, supports the perspective that the Lightning Process is a suitable approach for some with ME .'
Here is a link to the survey; http://www.meassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2010-survey-report-lo-res10.pdf
I looked at the survey and it does say that 25% greatly improved with LP BUT when you look at the
responses for LP, you only had 101 responses as apposed to 2137 responses for pacing. I may be wrong here but isn't 11% of 2137 responses(235 people greatly improved) better than 25% of 101 responses (25 greatly improved). If you look at the total improved pacing was 71.2%. So that is out of 2137 responses. When you look at LP you have total improved 49.3% out of 101 responses. Have I got this right?It seems to me that overall Pacing did better. Am I right? I am not great at stats or math but I don't see this as anything special for LP, like their website is making out and should be removed because to me this is misleading and not what the ME Association survey is saying. They are trying to make out that the ME Association is endorsing the LP, which I don't think it is.
'
ME Association’s 2010 Survey
‘Greatly improved’
This survey compares the benefits of a number of different approaches to CFS/ME and includes statistics on the benefits of the Lightning Process.
The ME association’s survey found that the Lightning Process came top of their poll for approaches that ‘greatly improved’ the symptoms of ME/CFS.The Lightning Process received the highest percentage out of all the 25 approaches for those feeling they had ‘greatly improved’ with 25.7%. The next closest was 14.8% for modafinil/provigil (a stimulant/analeptic). Another 18.8% felt the LP had helped them improve (totalling 44.5%).
CBT, being one of the mainstays of NHS approaches to this illness is useful as a yardstick 2.8% ‘greatly improved’, 23.1% ‘improved’.
The fact that the leading ME charity is assessing how well clients did by using the Lightning Process for their ME, and found it was rated as the most helpful, supports the perspective that the Lightning Process is a suitable approach for some with ME .'
Here is a link to the survey; http://www.meassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2010-survey-report-lo-res10.pdf
I looked at the survey and it does say that 25% greatly improved with LP BUT when you look at the
responses for LP, you only had 101 responses as apposed to 2137 responses for pacing. I may be wrong here but isn't 11% of 2137 responses(235 people greatly improved) better than 25% of 101 responses (25 greatly improved). If you look at the total improved pacing was 71.2%. So that is out of 2137 responses. When you look at LP you have total improved 49.3% out of 101 responses. Have I got this right?It seems to me that overall Pacing did better. Am I right? I am not great at stats or math but I don't see this as anything special for LP, like their website is making out and should be removed because to me this is misleading and not what the ME Association survey is saying. They are trying to make out that the ME Association is endorsing the LP, which I don't think it is.
