Some of the subjects had been suffering for a very long time(more than 30 years) while some of the younger ones had only been ill for 3 months. The average time for the conventional treatment had been 6 years and 10 months and none of the patients had recovered . This indicates that for the subjects who had been ill for a long time we had selected the most difficult cases who had resisted all efforts of conventional treatment. Most of the subjects (78% ) recovered fully in less than the average time of 26 days, with 74% showing a marked improvement in under 14 days .The few outliers on the higher side of the distribution were probably no longer suffering from CFS after treatment but were feeling ill from another intercurrent condition which did not respond to the regimen. On the other hand, of the 45 subjects who recovered fully, the one who had had ulcerative colitis (Krohn’s disease) for 20 years needed to continue the treatment for 60 days before her Krohn’s disease was cured.

The problem of the outliers emphasizes the need for a non-subjective diagnostic tool for CFS. Such a test is reported to have been found by researchers in Newcastle in Australia. They claim to have found at least 7 different types of CFS. This test will be of great benefit for diagnosis in at least two ways:- Firstly, before treatment it will be possible to diagnose unequivocally that the subject in fact has CFS; and secondly, after the treatment it will show that the patient is no longer suffering from CFS. If the patient is still not feeling up to par, it will enable the doctor to seek the source of the problem in some other cause. Sinusitis is one problem that is rather slow in responding to the treatment, although some problems of the gastro-intestinal tract seem to respond more quickly, albeit they take a little longer to resolve than does the CFS.

Using the unpaired t-test to compare the times gives a value of p < 5x10EXP(-16). This makes the conclusion that the new regimen is better than the conventional treatment certain.

A question often asked about the regimen, is whether it is permanent. So far there have been no relapses out of all of those who have recovered. Of the present group they are all still going strong after times ranging from 0 to 22 months however, of those that recovered in the first group of October 1996, one woman is very active and still completely well after 4 years and 1 month., and none of the others have relapsed. The results demonstrate that the new regimen affects a permanent cure although it has not been in use long enough to present figures longer than 4 years. On the other hand, if a conventional treatment , such as an antibiotic , cures the patient and he/she does not relapse for 6 months, the cure is regarded as permanent, and if the patient is re-infected, this is regarded as another illness.

If we combine the groups from 1996 and 1998 we get a recovery rate of 112 out of 119 = 94%. . This figure is more reliable because of the larger numbers of patients. However, there is still a doubt in some minds because of the subjective nature of the diagnosis. This could be resolved by the use of the objective test mentioned above, whereby certain patients who may in fact be somewhat emotional would be eliminated from the category of true CFS. Any truly psychosomatic cases would also be eliminated and would not be treated with this regimen, but other procedures would be applied.

Combining the results for both groups gives the following results :-

average time of suffering before trying the new regimen = 7.13 years

average time to experience marked improvement = 16.06 days

It must be borne in mind that although the average time for recovery is only 16 days there is a considerable range among the subjects, the time varying from 0.5 days to as long as 10 months.

Of these 73% recovered in 12 days or less, 87% in 23 days or less, 94% in 39 days or less, while 97% recovered in less than 2 months! This variation probably will be reduced when an objective test for the disease has been applied. However , some patients , who do not understand the nature of statistical data, will be very disappointed if they expect to be cured in 16 days and actually require to continue the regimen for as long as 10 months. On the other hand, the "lucky" ones will be highly delighted if they recover in 12 hours. It is usually recommended that the regimen be continued for a full two months to make sure of the permanence of the recovery.

Report on 50 patients from 1996 to 1998 as at 11 June 1998