• 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.

Open Medicine Foundation bags Dr Naviaux

akrasia

akrasia

Senior Member
Messages
215
Never Give Up said:
I've had some correspondence with Dr. Naviaux, here's what he told me:

"I have only been working in the CFS world for a year, but we have already made several discoveries that have a chance to offer real hope for people who have suffered for so long. We have a paper in review at JAMA. If it is published, we will have a real start on seeing CFS in a new light, and having real tools for new ways to treat patients as individuals, and not just as a patient with CFS."

Very encouraging!
Click to expand...

Many thanks for contacting Naviaux.

I glanced at the JAMA guidelines for publication, indicating how long the process can take from submission to acceptance and it's seems remarkably fast.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/public/WhyPublish.aspx

So cheering this, seen against the backdrop of Wallit's obscurantism.
 
S

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
akrasia said:
Many thanks for contacting Naviaux.

I glanced at the JAMA guidelines for publication, indicating how long the process can take from submission to acceptance and it's seems remarkably fast.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/public/WhyPublish.aspx

So cheering this, seen against the backdrop of Wallit's obscurantism.
Click to expand...

Here's the relevant bit:

JAMA said:
  • Time to first decision overall (median): 3 days for initial decision without review; 38 days with review
  • Fast publication: median time from acceptance to publication is 2-23 days for Online First publication and 34-40 days for publication in print
Click to expand...

So a median of 38 days to a decision... then maybe some faffing with revisions before full acceptance, which might not be included in this timeline... plus up to a median of 23 days before it would go online... so in all, a couple of months, possibly a bit of revision faffing.

But it's in review now, so we don't know if it's been accepted, and they have an 11% acceptance rate. OTOH, this sounds like a major breakthrough so maybe it's in with a good chance. I hope we don't have to wait forever while they work their way down the journal foodchain.

And whatever it is, it's going to need replicating... and I'm not sure how close they are to therapies, even if the model is confirmed.

But yes, it is hugely cheering! :)
 
Scarecrow

Scarecrow

Revolting Peasant
Messages
1,904
Location
Scotland
Sasha said:
I don't understand the reference to "playing dead"...
Click to expand...

http://www.nofone.org/#!significance-of-naviaux-2015-fragile-x/ctef
It is significant because Dr. Naviaux's view differs rather meaningfully from the conventional view of autism which holds that autism is primarily a neuro-developmental disorder that arises from genetic alterations that are largely irreversible. Dr. Naviaux instead believes that what is "going wrong" in both mouse models is a metabolic syndrome that he calls the cell danger response that gets chronically activated. Dr. Naviaux believes further believes that this cell-driven cascade or syndrome is behind human autism and can be triggered any number of ways including, perhaps, even by certain types of DNA damage or abnormalities such as those seen in the fragile X model. This "moves the culprit" from FMRP gene per se and to the cell danger response thus providing a downstream target or unifying mechanism for autism research.
Click to expand...

I just found this reference to cell danger response. Perhaps there's a further explanation elsewhere.
 
S

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
That's all over my head but here are the highlights:

Naviaux said:
Highlights
•The Cell Danger Response (CDR) is defined in terms of an ancient metabolic response to threat.

•The CDR encompasses inflammation, innate immunity, oxidative stress, and the ER stress response.

•The CDR is maintained by extracellular nucleotide (purinergic) signaling.

•Abnormal persistence of the CDR lies at the heart of many chronic diseases.

•Antipurinergic therapy (APT) has proven effective in many chronic disorders in animal models.
Click to expand...
Nice find, @Scarecrow. :)
 
*GG*

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
First seeing this, I was thinking how is it good for a Dr to already be fired "bagged" from a place that is so new. I see it is good news!

GG
 
S

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
ggingues said:
First seeing this, I was thinking how is it good for a Dr to already be fired "bagged" from a place that is so new. I see it is good news!

GG
Click to expand...

Does "bag" mean "fire" in some countries?

Come to think of it, in the UK, to "sack" someone is to fire them.

In the UK, if you "bag" something, it means you've managed to grab something good that other people wanted!
 
S

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
ggingues said:
Hunters use it sometimes to mean they got the game they are after. So not good in that sense either :)
Click to expand...

That too, but I think it's quite apt! They've got a big prize.

But does it mean "fired"? I googled and couldn't find that it did.
 
*GG*

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
Sasha said:
That too, but I think it's quite apt! They've got a big prize.

But does it mean "fired"? I googled and couldn't find that it did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not finding it either. So it's a local thing, or a figment of my imagination! :thumbdown::bang-head:

GG
 
S

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
This interesting analysis by Cort suggests that OMF bagged Naviaux for a reason:

Cort said:
The mantra at the Severely Ill/Big Data study at the Open Medicine Foundation is to follow the evidence where it leads. We don't know exactly what Davis has found or if will be ultimately validated. We do know that something eyebrow raising involving the mitochondria has shown up in the early stages of the Open Medicine Foundation's End ME/CFS Severely Ill study. Something eyebrow raising enough for a mitochondrial expert to join the fold.

Davis has found abnormalities before but this is the first one, he told me, that has really leapt off the charts. It was orders of magnitude different from normal.

Whatever the finding is it has apparently lead to a mitochondrial expert, Robert Naviaux, MD, PhD being added to the Open Medicine Foundation's Scientific Advisory Board...
Click to expand...

More here:

http://www.cortjohnson.org/forums/t...patient-study-turns-to-the-mitochondria.3949/
 
Last edited:
shannah

shannah

Senior Member
Messages
1,429
Apparently the paper has been turned down. How disappointing there's a hold up.

Post #18 on Cort's site on the weekend states:

"it was turned down for publishment by the JAMA because he does not have enough subjects..so he is trying to get more funding for Dr. Cheney's patients to be in the study..and or look for a different journal to publish. But it will happen eventually."

http://www.cortjohnson.org/forums/t...dy-turns-to-the-mitochondria.3949/#post-14886
 
You must log in or register to reply here.