Such a shame this info gets lost and not explored...lack of funding...Alex did you notice benefits from it?
I have discussed this at length a few times. The treatment had about a 60% good improvement rate, 30% partial or little improvement , and 10% actually got worse. No good numbers of cures, and due to limitations in the study we cannot be sure these were not natural recoveries. The doctor involved was one of the early CFS researchers here, and was a target for our medical watchdogs, along with other CFS docs at that time. The last he was doing research I think he was looking at exhausted female athletes and hormone changes in them to try to find a clue. He is no longer involved with CFS research or treatment.
Some of the things being tested were autonomic retraining and high dose omega 3 therapy, though manipulation of fats in the diet was a core theme, as these govern eicosanoid synthesis.
Its interesting that he had three tests he was investigating that might have been investigated to see if they were clinically useful or even diagnostic. One was for metabolic rate, one was for autonomic testing, and the last was a simple opthalmascope, which is now the subject of as yet unpublished research I am waiting for out of the UK, though I do not know if the findings are the same yet.
I was in the 30% partial improvement group. It worked for a while, but with my doctor shut down and being unable to seek his advice I had to abandon the approach when I ran into problems, though this was years later.
Look up Gray and Martinovic on PubMed, they have one paper there. I lived just a few houses up from Dr Martinovic's surgery.
