Lee Daniel Crocker said:
> Though most doctors now take CFS more seriously than in the past
> (even CDC now recognizes it as a valid diagnosis), there is not
> any evidence or consensus for a link to fat in the diet. It is
> probably a bad idea to spread that rumor, as it may encourage
> someone to increase their fat intake and risk heart disease.
> It's probably not as bad, though, as recommending latest snake
> oil peddled by the local drug pusher (i.e. "health food store").
> A good place for up-to-date, understandable and responsible
> medical advice is <http://www.healthcentral.com>.
Yeah, I wouldn't have taken the LEF bait, except that they had an abstract of a controlled study from a European journal about Adapton successfully treating CFS. There could be all kinds of reasons why that study is invalid - I have no idea which European journals are reputable, or I suppose they could even be manufacturing phony abstracts - but it seemed like a reasonable chance to take, especially when there is so much leading edge CFS research that no one seems to know about.
Does anyone else have an opinion about the LEF? I found their CFS info to be hit and miss - a few of the things they recommend are promising leading edge treatments, with prelimary studies confirming their usefulness. But they still mention the Epstein-Barr hypothesis, which was long ago disproven.
I am also put off by the hype-hype-hype of the language they choose, and the fact that they sell the products that they write about. But so far as I know, no one else is covering the same topics that they are.
They also offer a number of blood tests without a prescription, which should warm the heart of any medical anarchist.