Talk:Vagus nerve infection hypothesis
Evidence section[edit source | reply | new]
"Indirect evidence is discussed at length in the hypothesis paper. Direct evidence of viral infection in the vagus nerve would be very difficult to obtain because the entire vagus nerve cannot be removed to be biopsied." This section should summarize the indirect evidence mentioned in the paper. Send me a message via my profile page if you'd like to summarize this and need a copy of the paper. --JenB (talk) 17:29, 10 August 2018 (EDT)
http://thelowhistaminechef.com/harvard-neuroscientist-dr-michael-van-elzakker-chronic-fatigue-vagus-nerve-link/ provides a really accessible discussion of Van Elzakker's work from Van Elzakker himself. Worth going through and more detail to help expand this page. --JenB (talk) 07:58, 9 December 2015 (PST)
the 'Learn More' (CFS Remission blog) seem to argue against the VNIH ? - suggest add explanation, & move to new heading 'criticism'. perhaps add note that 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'. the 'Notable Studies' (Barnden MRI) - needs explanation of how this is related to the VNIH --Suelala (talk) 08:54, 11 April 2016 (PDT)
When I fixed the </references> tag, I did get this error.
Warning: Vagus nerve infection hypothesis is calling Template:Citation with more than one value for the "first5" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.
Warning: Vagus nerve infection hypothesis is calling Template:Citation with more than one value for the "authorlink5" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.
Warning: Vagus nerve infection hypothesis is calling Template:Citation with more than one value for the "last6" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.
I know the page is categorized for template errors but figures I would post the errors here.
