Those of you who have read Marie Rhode's previous scientific review and discussion of the fault-lines in the existing autoimmune model in MS, and the arguments for infectious causes, especially Cpn, have appreciated the dedicated and rigorous analysis she has brought to the topic. Her discussion has made a real difference for people who have been given the standard medical schtick about MS as if it is fact, not theory.Now she has gone a step further and given us a lucid discussion of the limitations of our own model. As scientifically minded as Marie is, it urked her that our website did not offer a critique of our own approach here. She takes science and informed consent in patient care very seriously. The enthusiastic anecdotal reports for CAP treatment should not blinker intelligent adults to being able to take rational and considered treatment decisions. I laud her in taking this issue to task and providing us with such a high quality discussion.I would add that much of her discussion applies to CFS, RA, and any other CAP treatment, and should be read by all of us. It has been said before, but all of us here are engaged in an "N of one" empirical experiment. We are fortunate to be joined by others and have reports of real and significant progress. But we also need to keep our wits about us and understand that our approach is indeed an experiment. My thanks to Marie for exploring this in the true spirit of good science and healthy discussion.