Post by Lisa Petrison on May 1, 2013 18:24:18 GMT -5
Here is a 2013 study showing that 93% of a group of CFS patients had mycotoxins in their urine. The authors are Joseph Brewer, Jack Thrasher, David Straus, Roberta Madison and Dennis Hooper.
www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/5/4/605
Subsequent to the publication of this paper, a rumor arose in the CFS community that the patients came from a doctor who specialized in mold illness and therefore that the findings should not be considered generalizable to the CFS population as a whole.
I thus wrote to the doctor in question (Dr. Joseph Brewer of Kansas City) and asked him about this rumor. Following is his response, which he stated that I should feel free to share publicly.
***
Lisa,
Although I am an infectious disease specialist, I had no focus whatsoever on “mold issues.” Prior to February 2012 (when I first heard about the urine mycotoxin assay at RealTime Laboratories) I didn’t even have an interest in mycotoxins or environmental illness. These findings surprised me as much as anyone as the results began to unfold last year.
These patients were all randomly tested. These are long standing patients of mine that were previously diagnosed with CFS / ME (basically “average CFS patients”). We simply discussed the test and offered it to them at routine follow-up clinic visits. Very few suspected mold illness until I brought it up at their routine visits.
We only found that they “lived / worked in buildings with visible mold” after we asked. Some patients didn’t even remember the exposure until we prodded a bit (mainly because the exposure had been so far in the past – such as an apartment they lived in college).
I now see patients every week that are shocked when I bring up mold. They have very impressive exposure histories but no one asked.
If these CFS patients who are on the blogs get tested, I suspect ~ 90% will be positive. A doctor from the East coast has found almost identical results to mine in their cases (90% positive). Same for a physician on the West coast.
Anyone that sends a specimen to RealTime Lab must pay for the test “up front” but many of the patients ended up getting reimbursed (at least for most of the testing cost) from the insurance. They were not biased since most were hoping to get reimbursed.
I think is hard for people to get their “arms around this” and want to implicate selection bias but that simply was not the case.
I hope that helps.
Joe Brewer, MD
**
Here is a blog by Cort Johnson related to this topic (though many of Cort's concerns with the study were addressed by Dr. Brewer's statement above).
www.cortjohnson.org/blog/2013/04/13/study-suggests-mold-exposure-can-cause-severe-effect-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-finally-meet-mold-study-finds-high-rates-of-m/
www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/5/4/605
Subsequent to the publication of this paper, a rumor arose in the CFS community that the patients came from a doctor who specialized in mold illness and therefore that the findings should not be considered generalizable to the CFS population as a whole.
I thus wrote to the doctor in question (Dr. Joseph Brewer of Kansas City) and asked him about this rumor. Following is his response, which he stated that I should feel free to share publicly.
***
Lisa,
Although I am an infectious disease specialist, I had no focus whatsoever on “mold issues.” Prior to February 2012 (when I first heard about the urine mycotoxin assay at RealTime Laboratories) I didn’t even have an interest in mycotoxins or environmental illness. These findings surprised me as much as anyone as the results began to unfold last year.
These patients were all randomly tested. These are long standing patients of mine that were previously diagnosed with CFS / ME (basically “average CFS patients”). We simply discussed the test and offered it to them at routine follow-up clinic visits. Very few suspected mold illness until I brought it up at their routine visits.
We only found that they “lived / worked in buildings with visible mold” after we asked. Some patients didn’t even remember the exposure until we prodded a bit (mainly because the exposure had been so far in the past – such as an apartment they lived in college).
I now see patients every week that are shocked when I bring up mold. They have very impressive exposure histories but no one asked.
If these CFS patients who are on the blogs get tested, I suspect ~ 90% will be positive. A doctor from the East coast has found almost identical results to mine in their cases (90% positive). Same for a physician on the West coast.
Anyone that sends a specimen to RealTime Lab must pay for the test “up front” but many of the patients ended up getting reimbursed (at least for most of the testing cost) from the insurance. They were not biased since most were hoping to get reimbursed.
I think is hard for people to get their “arms around this” and want to implicate selection bias but that simply was not the case.
I hope that helps.
Joe Brewer, MD
**
Here is a blog by Cort Johnson related to this topic (though many of Cort's concerns with the study were addressed by Dr. Brewer's statement above).
www.cortjohnson.org/blog/2013/04/13/study-suggests-mold-exposure-can-cause-severe-effect-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-finally-meet-mold-study-finds-high-rates-of-m/