Sounds encouraging so far. At least they haven't ruled it out as the possible cause of ME/CFS. It's just one more area of research that is being looked into. Which I think is a good thing.
I just wish upon wish it would all move with speed. I remember Robert Phair when he initially brought this idea to the open. That was a fair few years ago now. What's happened with the nano needle now? Has that one been abandoned? It seemed so hopeful and in my naivity I believed an answer would come soon. That was 6 years ago.... sorry to be pessimistic, it breaks my heart that our suffering is never ending. No answers. No one still knows what causes this cruel disease.
It's just tough. Being in the uk doesn't help. I am praying every day that I will get just a few years of health, one dayExactly. As Ron says in the video, they are not looking to prove this, they're looking to disprove it and so far they haven't been able to. Which is good, as far as the hypothesis goes.
I agree. The speed/wait is so difficult. The lack of any significant governmental/institutional funding is the real issue. The pandemic also has not helped of course. But they are making progress, and the nanoneedle is still very much part of the research. Many irons in the fire, so to speak.
Good to be cautious.Seen many theories come and go, Rituximab comes to mind, forgive me if I feel it won't be such a simple matter to solve the disease, even if we have the best scientist in the field with the most efficient method etc. Yeast is single cell, human have different cells with different specializations that can monitor each other in a big network, maybe only some cell types will remain trapped. Humans have a bacterial colony that might interact with this chemical process, humans can also modify their own environment more than a yeast can, human can change its temperature, perform exercise, consume food or drugs which might interact to break the state. Theres also the factor that some patients on this forum have already tried altering their relevant chemicals to escape the hypothetical trap. I hope this works but i'm not going to get my hopes up as it were.
Rituximab has helped many patients. But, doctors must select patients appropriately to use it.Seen many theories come and go, Rituximab comes to mind,
• Ron is excited, but so far they are trying to disprove the metabolic trap theory as this is the best way to test a theory.
These are slides from Dr. Phair's initial presentation at Stanford. One of the points he made was he was looking for common mutations. The trap doesn't get triggered just because one has a mutation.I read at another forum that patients have no more mutations in the enzyme in question than does controls. Does not sound great. Anyone have more info on this?
No idea. I think it would be a lot simpler if certain people hadn't decamped to s4ne making conversation difficult.
Doesn't that suggest that out of the many hundreds of drugs we would have taken between all of us, none of them would have been this/these drug(s)?