I think we are at the point where its abundantly clear that anyone who reads the supporting literature for GET in CFS, and has the training to understand scientific papers, must conclude that GET is not justifiable in CFS, and completely unjustifiable in ME. To ignore this leaves me with three options to conclude about the GET proponent, but more than one can be correct:
1. They have biased allegiance to this therapy. This can be for many reasons.
2. They did not perform due diligence and actually investigate the literature.
3. They are not capable of even basic understanding of scientific papers. Some of the errors and faults, which invalidate the research supporting GET in ME and CFS, are very basic and obvious. Nobody who is not biased, and has the training, and reads the papers, can miss every one of the failures.