“The diagnostic setting for CFS / ME, based on the symptoms described in medical records, and patients’ experience with Lightning Process.”
The Norwegian NAFKAM International Registry of Exceptional Courses of Disease Related to the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine is interested in studying those who respond extremely positively or negatively to Complementary and Alternative Medicine approaches and has recently been studying these patient’s in relation to the Lightning Process.
Important point:
The group of people the researchers chose to study for this report were specifically recruited because they had either had a strongly positive or strongly negative reaction to the LP – as a result of the figures in this report cannot be used this a general guide to how successful the LP, as this was never the point of this research.
One of the key questions the report addresses is; does the positive or negative effect of the LP depend on the criteria used for diagnosis. This is an important issue as some claim that only those who don’t have real CFS/ME benefit from the LP; and there is often debate as to what is real ME as there are a number of different criteria the diagnosis can be based (Canada, Fukuda, Oxford or IOM).
Four points are particularly interesting in the study
1. More than 80% of patients met at least one set of diagnostic criteria. 25% of these satisfied the stringent criteria set (Canada criteria).
This suggests at least 80% of this group can be considered to have a confirmed diagnosis of CFS/ME
2. 61% of this group of participants reported positive progress. This percentage was the same, no matter which set of diagnostic criteria used in NAFKAM review In this study and 25% qualified for the strictest criteria (Canada)
This suggests that those who did achieve positive results had the same diagnostic criteria and diagnosis as those who didn’t; suggesting there is no evidence for the claims that the LP is only effective for those without ‘real’ CFS/ME
3. Patients initially reported improvement after the use of LP, said at the follow-up that they were still better than before they used LP.
These longer term findings suggests changes experienced during the seminar are not temporary and can last over time.
4. Those patients who originally reported worsening after using LP, said at the follow-up that they still were either equally bad or had become worse than before they used LP.
The longer term findings of those who find no value in the LP is disappointing, but as these individuals are still living with CFS/ME their symptoms are likely to follow the natural course of the disease. This unfortunately includes periods of relapse and worsening of symptoms, and as such these reports are sad, but not unexpected.
It’s also interesting to note that this study was triggered by reports to this organization of 3 people in 2012 that they felt worse after the LP; yet although they received reports of exceptionally positive outcomes from 22 individuals in the same period this didn’t trigger an investigation into why so many people were finding it so valuable.
