Mary Dimmock noted that CFSAC, the federal advisory committee on ME/CFS, which is generally not especially noted for it’s efficiency, nevertheless responded to the P2P draft report “unprecedented speed, focus and decisiveness” in its special session to respond to the P2P draft report. The committee had clearly gone over the report carefully beforehand and quickly provided many recommendations to strengthen the report.
The Solve ME/CFS Initiative reported that the committee “judiciously reviewed the P2P draft report and created a thorough, detailed, and thoughtful response.”
Strangely, the committee, whose own recommendations to the federal government include numerical targets did not address the major flaw in the flaw in the report – the lack of specific funding and other targets.
The Solve ME/CFS Initiative noted that for all the P2P reports good points that it lacks “teeth”; that (it’s) recommendations are broad and there is no direct funding associated with them.” CFSAC’s response did emphasize the poor funding allotted ME/CFS but absent specific funding targets the NIH will be allowed to determine what is sufficient funding and what is not – a dangerous oversight.