I got diagnosed with POTS a few years ago after 20 years of weird symptoms, and this really resonates. Thanks for writing this.

Lol that's the work of our old provost (aihumanity.emory.edu) whose departure to OSU wasn't exactly mourned

I agree, but at the same time I see people get hopeful about all these small-N studies coming across my feed, many of which are, at worst, clearly noise, or at best, unlikely to be replicable (e.g., see here for why the LC vs control prediction is flawed given the N: www.nature.com/articles/s41...)

I dunno if it's worth getting hopes up for.

It's an interesting finding but the sample size is small, it uses a relatively unproven PET tracer, and the statistics are a bit fishy (though I know more about MRI than PET so not sure how fishy). I wouldn't say they've found a definitive biomarker as much as established that it's worth studying.

Try @disabledinstem.bsky.social!

I use it with canvas and there are about 1-2 students each time (out of 30-50) who have glitches. I print off a few paper copies for this. Best approach I have found, esp. since some students need to use computers for disability reasons

I've been trying to switch to an actual stimulant for a couple years now but I guess drs are not too excited about switching to a scheduled drug. If it's an NDRI is it sunosi? Not sure I want to try another NDRI but I'm glad it's working for you!

Interesting, thanks! I was curious because I started on bupropion for fatigue before being diagnosed with POTS, and it helps the fatigue but makes the core POTS symptoms worse (was a blessing in disguise because it made me actually notice those symptoms and figure out my diagnosis).

How does it help POTS for you?

I'm sorry to be missing it (not at CPC this year) but excited to check out the preprint!

My trainee self ventured into methods my advisors weren't experts in, and some of the best help I got was through some form of peer review (mostly people stopping at my conf posters to tell me I'd done things wrong). Done constructively and thoughtfully, critical peer review isn't a bad thing.

I have... thoughts... about this paper. It is easy to get poor reliability. Lots of papers already out on what methods etc. help to get good reliability. Sam Zorowitz & Yael Niv have a good review paper on this.

Hmm looked it up and it's six years and only at some institutes (NIMH is one). So not as bad as I thought

Not to disagree that this is something - but may not help many people affected

Isn't there a five year time limit post-PhD for Ks though? And less for K99 IIRC. If that still applies then not many people will still be eligible.

And this is just to apply, not to get a new award. Even if new app is funded it will be a year+ delay between the cancelled grant and a new one.