Fibromyalgia, Hypothyroidism, Thyroid Hormone Resistance

Science & Logic 
Critical Rationalist Analyses of Scientific & Logical Issues

Why This JournalAnalyses of HypothesesQ&A
dot_clear.gif (54 bytes)

Homepage

Site Map

How to Contact Us

General Information

Clinical Care

News

Publications

Patient-to-Patient
by Jackie Yellin


Dr. Gina Honeyman-Lowe

Dr. John C. Lowe

Questions & Answers

Vicky Massey

Fibromyalgia Research Foundation

Links to Other Websites

Myofascial Pain

Nutrition

bookcovr.jpg (3834 bytes)

The Metabolic Treatment
of Fibromyalgia

by Dr. John C. Lowe
Readers' Comments

Read about Your Guide to Metabolic Health



The Schneider/Brady Proposal
to Reclassify Fibromyalgia

Menu of Critical Comments on the Schneider/Brady Proposal

Dr. Michael Schneider and Dr. David Brady recently proposed that fibromyalgia no longer be classified as "primary" and "secondary." They proposed that instead it be classified as "true" and "pseudo." We (Jackie Yellin and Dr. John C. Lowe) have objected to the proposal as poorly conceived and of no value to the field of fibromyalgia nor to fibromyalgia patients and the clinicians who care for them. The original Schneider/Brady proposal is available online, but unfortunately, a fee is charged for access to the proposal. All the other communications regarding the proposal are available without charge through the links below.

The menu below lists criticisms of the Schneider/Brady Proposal
and Drs. Schneider and Brady's rebuttals.

Criticism by Jackie Yellin

"The Brady/Schneider Proposal: A Misdirected Reclassification of Fibromyalgia"
(Critique by Dr. John C. Lowe published in Dyn. Chir.)
 http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/20/04/07.html

"Fibromyalgia Syndrome: Reclassification is Definitely Needed"
(Rebuttal to Dr. Lowe's critique by Drs. Schneider & Brady)
 http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/20/07/20.html

"The Schneider/Brady Proposal to Reclassify Fibromyalgia: Fatally Flawed"
(Reply to Schneider/Brady Rebuttal by Dr. John C. Lowe.
 Written for Dyn. Chir. The editors declined to publish the rebuttal because they felt
enough had been said in their publication on the issue. This final
rebuttal, however, is important for reasons explained in the rebuttal.)