Like I said it's obviously a disgrace. By encouraging results I was referring to the present NIH study, which has had and still has some issues, but if it throws up something encouraging may change attitudes towards funding. By attitudes to ME/CFS I had in mind the "CDC study reveals CFS patients are severely physically impaired, but have normal mental health" thread.Yes but it's an estimate which shows an intention. If they intended to spend more it would be built into the estimate. In any case an estimate is generally a +/- figure of a certain value for example 10% not 100%.
Cant remember who said it but if you dont look for something you can't find it. Why do we have to wait for encoraging results to get funding when we need funding to get any results never mind encouraging results.
If they were serious about this disease they would have addressed this issue long before now. This is worse than Walitt and FMD control groups. This is neglect. I don't understand why more people aren't up in arms about this.
I agree with what you say about if they were serious about this disease and neglect, it's shocking. But things seem to be moving slowly in the right direction, and we may be approaching a tipping point where everything changes, including funding for research. The current estimate could be no more than someone having to put a number in there to complete the table, so just extrapolating from the past. It may bear no relation to what really happens in 2017, when the landscape will hopefully look very different.
To be honest I don't know much about it, but was asked to comment so am just writing what occurs to me. I'm normally as cynical and critical as anyone on PR, but I can't help being a little optimistic at present that there is a chance that things are slowly improving.