Speaking of biomarkers...

[urbantravels]

New article in the journal Nature with a commentary on the sorry state of biomarker research - looks like we aren't the only ones with a problem.

Anyone got a Nature sub and can get the full text?

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v469/n7329/full/469156a.html

Bring on the biomarkers
George Poste

Journal name: Nature
Volume: 69,
Pages: 156157
Date published: (13 January 2011)
DOI:
10.1038/469156a

Published online
12 January 2011

Nature | Comment

Bring on the biomarkers
George Poste

The dismal patchwork of fragmented research on disease-associated biomarkers should be replaced by a coordinated 'big science' approach, argues George Poste.

 

[illsince1977]

I wonder if the article is related to the editorial in the same issue.
First do no harm http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v469/n7329/full/469132a.html , which focuses on a lack of biomarkers in psychiatric diagnoses. There is also a downloadable article about a new(?) tool Japanese neuroscientists are using as a biomarker in mental illness NIRS. Wonder how our brains would read on this? Would the results be more grist for the mill that considers ours a mental illness rather than a physical/organic one that does CNS damage? Who knows! I can't imagine that we have been part of the test population despite having heard Japan is ahead of many other governments in taking CFS seriously.
I do not have access to the article you started this thread about. Sorry!