..................
If you have found these pages useful and are willing to help advertise this site:
Please contact 3 groups as may be found at Yahoo Groups, with a similar problem to yours: Join the sites and send the three organisations you have selected at random a few emails to tell them about this site: Paill Spectrum: Remind them a few times after the initial email as well through further emails.
Quizdoc is the Paill Spectrum site at www.quizdoc.com
Helping other people to a chance to help themselves is something you can do, without "committing" to Paill Spectrum or the model. If you found this site useful, chances are that others may feel the same, if they have the opportunity.
This page has the necessary contact information for professional and public inquiries
Just click on the required
e-mail address
to go to send e-mail page
If you are a doctor willing to treat patients
If you are a patient and want information
or wish to tell us about your case
If you (a doctor) wish to consult with us ;
re clinical case.
If you would like to be added to our mailing list
Contact for general enquiries
Thank you for your interest in the Clinical syndrome, (Paill Spectrum) which I have identified. The medical knowledge of the syndrome is presented as a theory or “model” and proposes to explain a number of gaps or deficits in our current understanding of a number of medical conditions. Whilst it proposes a different viewpoint, it is compatible with what is seen in clinical practice every day. Recent media declarations identifying that mood fluctuations form a distinct psychiatric illness called IED (Intermittent Explosive Disorder) would appear to relate to the similar symptoms as listed in my syndrome description.
The same medicines can be used to treat the same conditions as are currently treated, for the same reasons.
The model is based on conventional medical concepts (such as immunity, infection, inflammation) and uses very traditional ways of interpreting these concepts.
The Paill Spectrum model sets criteria for:
The Paill Spectrum model sets criteria for:
The Paill Spectrum model includes standard inflammatory markers:
Much of the basic medical information, (not specifically relating to Paill Spectrum), is readily available in any good book of medicine.
There are a large number of conditions in medicine for which there is no known cause, or reason, as to why these illnesses appear. This model proposes possible answers, which will need to be validated by further research, much as any new scientific model would require.
The “infective explanation” of the cause of a number of illnesses, has been alluded to in the medical media over the decades. It is consistent with current existing knowledge.
There are also a number of conditions in medicine where a number of medical practitioners would not even agree exist. Chronic fatigue syndrome and chronic fatigue are such conditions. It cannot be shown that research based on the CDC criteria of chronic fatigue syndrome is able to define that there are definite differences between the characteristics of those affected and those who are not affected. (Strange!) Where there is no general medical acceptance of widely “known” conditions, treatment protocols are bound to vary. The chronic fatigue group of conditions has spawned a large number of “conventional” therapies in an attempt to address the symptoms of this illness, and these therapies are used by a range of practitioners in a number of different protocols.
The model I have suggested proposes a single standard clinical protocol for the symptomatic identification, clinical assessment and medical monitoring of a number of clinical symptoms, based on reference to standard serological protocols and accepted immune modifying nutritional therapies. It is based on conventional disease models and uses typical or conventional ways of looking at symptoms, signs, and blood tests for disease.
The first step in assessment of illness and the causes of illness are not clinical trials. The first step in the assessment of illness is the development of a “theory” or “model” which may then form the basis of a trial. The new proposal for the existence of IED, may in fact relate to other researchers following up my own advertised clinical theory or model.
I believe I have developed a model of disease (Paill Spectrum), which is robust enough to serve as the basis of clinical research. Such a theory to be relevant must have as its basis, consistency with a broad range of clinical observations such as may be found in clinical medical practice. The Paill Spectrum model proposes that there are “simple biochemical markers” of illness in a number of traditional medical illnesses that can validate the presence or absence of illness.
Currently many illnesses have purely “clinical” criteria for their diagnosis. Having purely clinical criteria form the basis of the diagnosis of illness is not scientific. Using clinical criteria for diagnosis reduces inter-observer reproducibility of a diagnosis. Two doctors cannot make the same decision about what is wrong with the same patient in the same circumstances. Treatments vary as a result. There are numerous examples in clinical medicine where doctors disagree as to what the substance of a patients’ diagnosis may be, for many years, before a final diagnosis is made. Even then, there is often still disagreement. Diagnosis is not often possible except over many years. Back to Rationale Top
Having a biochemical marker of the presence of illness, is conventional medicine. An easy example is the performance of Blood glucose levels, Serum Fructosamine or HBA1c levels in the diagnosis of diabetes. The model of disease I have proposed is scientifically robust, and reproducible results should be obtained by a number of different medical practitioners using the clinical protocol. Scientific studies are therefore able to challenge, prove, or disprove the model as suggested. Scientific studies require as a prerequisite, a model to test, as a precursor to the study process.
I have spent a considerable amount of time and expense promoting the Paill Spectrum Disease model over the last two years. I believe the model is developed to the point where it is possible to easily inform other practitioners to identify:
Once the theory is more widely known, other doctors will be able to assess the robustness of the model. As a GP in a small suburban medical practice working with one other doctor, I do not have the time or resources to undertake clinical trials. Accordingly, I have taken the view that the important step at this time is to create exposure or awareness of the syndrome amongst others.
I have already presented the clinical syndrome has been presented to
It has taken approximately a year of lead-time to organise this level of exposure,
for my medical syndrome model.
This amount of exposure is not a cheap process in terms of time or money. There has been a lot of work by myself and staff in making all these submissions to all these conferences. It also necessitates a lot of time away from my practice with consequent economic loss.
In short, I have undertaken all the conventional steps of an inventor to inform other medical practitioners and achieve recognition for work done, at considerable cost to myself. I have done this because I believe that it is the right thing to do, to show this information to other doctors to create an awareness of an important new syndrome and the importance of the recognition of potentially very important biochemical markers of disease.
My goal is not to find more patients by promoting this illness.
There is an important consideration of being open and honest to people at a basic simple local level about what medical work you have done. My patients are all very supportive and have a high opinion of me, my abilities and in my judgement. It is no dark secret in my current site of work, that I believe I have identified a new medical syndrome.
In promoting the condition of Paill Spectrum, my advisors indicated that I would need to add my name to any advertising for the syndrome to improve “repute.” Consequently, my name has been added to advertising for the condition, as a reference point. My advisors have advised me to separate myself as much as possible from the process, for obvious legal reasons.
Back to Rationale Top
General Practitioners are called upon routinely to treat many conditions based on clinical markers of illness. Where a patient has a sore throat, these would be almost always be treated by a medical practitioner without any confirmation of infecting organism. Even in such a simple example, testing may in fact fail to culture any organism or may culture so many organisms that the true nature of the infecting organism is unable to be determined. A general practitioner would unusually treat a throat infection because it looks like a “bacterially infected throat,” such as would be expected to respond to antibiotics.
Much of the body is a lot more inaccessible and infecting organisms much less known than for a simple site such as a throat. Often the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the patient appears ill and that an antibiotic may be appropriate because it has worked in a similar patient with similar symptoms previously. While we may attach labels to many of these clinical events, there can often be no other confirmation than clinical, that what we believe has occurred, has in fact taken place.
The Paill Spectrum model is a significant advance because it proposes that biochemical markers of disease do exist and that these may be relevant to a number of medical illnesses. As such, this is a much more scientific and conventional view of illness. The presence of illness can be tested for and confirmed by observers independent of the clinician.
That further research is required for assessment of these types of claims is of course self-evident. Nevertheless, without a theory or model to test, there will be no trials. Someone has to take the first step and make the first advance. The Paill Spectrum syndrome has been developed in much the same way as most of the medical information that exists in our textbooks today. A practising clinician in the course of normal work notices consistent patterns of symptoms, signs, and investigations, which identify an illness, that are distinct and identifiable. As such, it is not different to any of the other conventional knowledge existing in the same textbooks. It does have the advantage over many illnesses that there are proposed biochemical markers of illness that correlate in a number of ways with the presence, absence, progression, regression, relapse of illness and response of illness to treatment. Back to Rationale Top
Paill Spectrum has a number of clinical presentations. It appears possible that the illness may be associated with other medical illness syndromes as well.
Where there appears to be a case for Paill Spectrum being the underlying cause for existing medical syndromes or conditions, any claims made differentiate what differences the Paill Spectrum model predicts will be found between the standard medical model and the Paill Spectrum medical model.
The web site has a disclaimer identifying that the condition is a new condition, currently unrecognised and that further research will need to be undertaken. It states that the information in the Paill Spectrum model of disease has been developed by a medical practitioner, namely Dr. Andrew Xxxxx. As such, the web site forms a reasonable platform for promoting a new medical condition worldwide to any potential audience. It is not a medical textbook nor does it claim to be anything other than what it is: a platform for promoting new ideas and a new model in the practice of medicine, based on basic scientific principles. Back to Rationale Top
Evidence supporting favourable outcomes for patients:
The protocol is simple, safe and involves usual treatments able to be prescribed by medical practitioners for a variety of indications. As such, it is not different to care as may be inadvertently delivered by medical practitioners under usual circumstances. As such, my conclusions are based on observations of usual incidents and attempting to define a cohesive explanation for such incidents.
I would regard the cases chosen on the web site as a representative sample of what people have experienced and sufficient to validate response to treatment. These types of treatments can be replicated on patients by “any” practitioner safely and easily by following the Submission protocol and by following patient cases longitudinally. The publication of the syndrome allows others to safely identify and treat people whose clinical presentation matches the syndrome description.
No practitioner has expressed any concern or fear in the use of tetracyclines or multi-vitamins as specified in the treatment protocol. These are very routine treatments. Doctors doing "usual" treatments, use these types of medications all the time.
Mood swings and irritability alter noticeably within two weeks of therapy in appropriately selected cases, following the criteria. Pain and tenderness is slower to respond and may take 1-3 months to show a clinical response to therapy, obvious when the patient is followed up. Most patients have shown a full or good partial response of pain and tenderness to therapy in the time frame of 1-3 months. Patients, who do not achieve the symptom response they are expecting, would be likely to give up therapy. From my observations, this does not occur.
I would point out that medical practitioners in fact prescribe the treatments described in the submission routinely every day. Tetracycline antibiotics and macrolide antibiotics are standard therapies for a number of conditions. They have well documented effect profiles in antibiotic medical references and texts. These antibiotics are often used on the clinical suspicion of an illness. For example, it may often be suspected that the patient has an illness such as a mycoplasma or Legionella chest infection or a condition such as perioral dermatitis, based solely on clinical criteria. Testing for diagnosis may often not even be possible, till after the clinical crisis has passed as the serological tests of diagnosis have not had time to show change in an acute situation.
The model I have promoted has a written syndrome description and accepted biological disease markers consistent with the “usual” pattern of use.
They are cheap and common cost-effective treatments.
Similarly nutritional and vitamin treatments are conventional therapies, used perhaps on a daily basis, by many practitioners. Back to Rationale Top
The only difference that the Paill Spectrum model suggests, is that there may be other clinical indications for the use of these medications (antibiotics, nutrition or diet), in other circumstances than are currently appreciated.
Clinical benefit would of course be best “proven” by randomised clinical control trials, but a general practice is not a suitable venue for such an activity. I would seek to encourage clinical trials as awareness of this disease model spreads.
Details in assessing patients:
Details in Treating Patients
Patients who present with an illness, which could be considered to be Paill Spectrum, often fall into a number of specific categories. A specific symptom complex will be present or it will not. Specific blood test criteria will be fulfilled or they will not. (The situation is actually a lot more complex than this black/ white statement, but it will suffice for most people in most circumstances using the syndrome model.
One common presentation involves patients who are moody, irritable, angry, or aggressive. They will usually state that they are definitely not depressed. They do not have any other psychiatric illness. They do not have an obvious respiratory illness or gastrointestinal symptoms. Their cardiovascular system appears normal on basic examination. They do not have diabetes. These people in short do not appear to have a recognised medial syndrome or problem. Usual medical practice is to tell these people that there is nothing wrong with them, or perhaps it is just a virus or perhaps it is just age. This is in spite of the definite expressed concerns of the people involved.
(Interestingly, there has been a recent announcement from an institute in the USA stating that this presentation may in fact form a psychiatric illness or syndrome. This announcement suggests that I have been promoting the new syndrome model long enough, to initiate enquiry by others. Parts of the Paill Spectrum model are being considered as explanations for observed behaviour, not fitting within recognised medical models).
Examination of a typical patient will often reveal significant balance problems, sweaty hands, and the presence of a characteristic profile of tender points in the body. These are not the typical tender areas, which may be described in for example, Fibromyalgia.
Where a symptom complex consistent with the syndrome description is suspected, blood tests as per the submitted protocol would be undertaken. These would be assessed and interpreted according to the PaillSpectrum Protocol.
A patient would return for the interpretation of blood tests. Where there are significant nutritionally related findings on the blood tests, nutritionally based therapy according to the protocol may be the only treatment initiated. Patients would be recommended to take multivitamins, zinc, perhaps given B12 injections or recommended to undertake a trial of wheat free diet for assessment of symptomatic benefit.
Where there exists significant mood changes or pain/ tenderness profiles, antibiotics are more likely to be necessary to achieve symptomatic relief. Treatment follows the protocol.
I explain to patients that I believe they are ill. I tell patients that the symptomatic changes will be obvious to them and often to the people around them, during the progress of treatment. Patients would be shown a picture of the syndrome and it would be explained to them that their symptoms appear to match the picture. People recognise the match between their own symptoms and the syndrome picture quite readily. I would inform people that the symptoms they are experiencing appear to match the medical condition in the picture. I tell people that at this point in time, I have identified this syndrome, and that it is not known to exist to many other medical practitioners.
I tell them the treatment I propose is very similar to treatments that many doctors prescribe for respiratory related illnesses or acne. People may commonly take these antibiotics for long periods of time for a number of reasons. The treatment is also cheaper than many other antibiotics, even under the PBS. (Australian Pharmaceutical Subsidy Scheme). In Australia, they must pay for their treatment, as they are not qualified to receive it under the PBS.
For mood problems, I tell people that the symptom changes are likely to be evident within about ten days to two weeks. Aches and pains are more resistant to treatment, and may take up to several months to improve. Often though again, many patients would have improvements in aches and pains within several weeks.
I bring patients back at about one month to confirm symptomatic response. At this visit, symptoms are logged as per protocol. This documents response and extent of response to therapy, providing confirmation of diagnosis and of success of treatment. If antibiotics are used, I generally recommend two further months of therapy. Symptomatic response is obvious enough that compliance with ongoing treatment is good. People see and feel that they are getting better and that the doctor can predict what happens to their symptoms, all following a specific treatment model.
All these treatments and tests are conventionally available and may in fact be “conventionally” used by other practitioners now for other indications or reasons. Therefore, the new disease model does not promote any previously unknown treatments. Back to Rationale Top
I am a General Practitioner working in a small suburban practice, with a usual General Practice caseload.
I have written and undertaken a number of medical service delivery programmes in my previous role as Chairman of the Brisbane South Division and as Medical Director of Brisbane Inner South Division of General Practice. I have also been involved with clinical trials and the methodology relating to these. These have all been time intensive activities, done at high cost to me.
In view of my previous experience, I believe I do not have the resources to undertake clinical trials. I do not have access to appropriate assistance such as Statisticians or other clinical assistance. Involvement in trials is very expensive, simply in terms of clinical time. Many research announcements come from Institutes or Academia, where there is funding and support to develop new ideas and proposals. In contrast, everything that I do costs me time and money, and adversely affects the profitability of my medical work.
Trials involve accessory employees and would involve a much higher cost than simply my personal time. Other organizations supporting trials such as Hospitals and the Public sector subsidise their specialist employees to perform much of this activity. In General Practice, there is no such safety net. Performance of blood tests under trial protocols is not subsidized under Medicare, creating further costs. The caseload in a typical General Practice also makes clinical research difficult.
This is probably why so little clinical research work comes out of general practice. I believe that the undertaking of clinical trials is thus best left to others.
Nutritional and antibiotic therapy has a well-established basis for its use in the therapy of individuals. There are no strange concoctions, weird products or arcane rituals involved in treating people. In fact, the most common treatment that I use, (multivitamins), is nutritionally based and is available at Woolworths ( a commercial supermarket chain), across the road.
The knowledge of what to do, and why,
to achieve specific aims,
is a very potent weapon.
I have taken the view that while I have identified a syndrome model by observation and deduction, it is not appropriate for me to continue any further clinical work in this direction. The appropriate next step is to publicise the syndrome to give others the opportunity to undertake research. As a prerequisite for research, there must be a clinical question that research aims to answer and the appreciation or awareness that there is a research question to answer. I have publicized my syndrome model to these ends, within the limits of my resources.
The symptoms, signs, and blood tests form a distinct recognisable clinical entity. I have heard that many people looking at the syndrome picture are readily able to recognise themselves. This would usually confirm their own beliefs that they are unwell, though often little has often been able to be found by their carers and they have been left feeling unwell and unable to receive any help.
They protocol I have provided can be easily administered or replicated by another practitioner. There is enough clinical information to allow a doctor to safely and effectively treat a patient with any of the syndrome complex.
The condition responds to the treatment protocol provided in time frames that are quite predictable according to the syndrome model.
Once you know what you are looking for, it is not hard to diagnose.
Clinical medicine is a well-recognised scientific regimen. There are a large number of medical problems that are defined by clinical criteria alone. For instance, there is no way to diagnose hypertension, than by the taking of a person’s blood pressure: a clinical event alone.
The Paill Spectrum syndrome model has recognised biochemical markers of disease. They are interpreted in the same way, as any textbook of medicine would tell you they are interpreted.
There are also recognised clinical formats for assessing illness in a sector such as general practice. In complex terms these are called “n=1 trials” This simply means that the patient is followed up with time longitudinally for progression or regression of symptoms, signs or blood tests. I have records in my files from divisional days from a well-known local medical researcher on just such a trial. General Practice work falls wholly within this type of format. For example, GPs diagnose a patient's Blood Pressure by taking measurements, and then adjust treatment based on response to treatment measured on clinical parameters. The scientific principle involved is the same as that which justifies the existence of the Paill Spectrum model of disease.
Currently, this is in progress. General Practitioners do not do much clinical research and access to appropriate resources for this type of work is difficult in this sector.
Publication is also a very slow process. Back to Rationale Top
Identification of bacteria is an activity for a microbiologist or a laboratory.
In general practice, there are only clinical criteria and in this case biochemical markers to perform, to assess the progression or regression of illness.
Accordingly, the existence of a bacterial cause is inferred or deduced. It is more correct to claim that I have identified a clinical syndrome than to claim that I have identified bacteria.
From what I have seen over the years, it is probable that the inferred causative bacteria suggested by the syndrome model is a mycobacterial class organism, probably intracellular. The description on the web site is colloquial but consistent with this deduction.
Treatment protocols for these types of organisms may be found in any good appropriate textbook of medicine. All my treatments are consistent with these considerations.
Whether the presence or absence of the organism can be confirmed by other methods is a task for others individuals with other resources and skills to mine. Only time will tell to what extent the Paill Spectrum syndrome model is validated.
What evidence is there that it is a bacterium?
How does your Treatment alleviate the Condition?
The clinical syndrome responds to antibacterial antibiotics. Hence, it is a bacterium based on clinical criteria.
Response to treatment can be measures either by symptoms, signs, or biochemical markers of illness.
Immune factors alter the progression of infective conditions, so it is logical for there to be an emphasis on improvement of immune risk factors via a focus on:
The public media abounds with examples of how a number of medical conditions and behaviour especially in children improves with nutritional and dietary therapies.
How to assess medical conditions e.g. If there are dyslexia symptoms:
Most patients are unaware of their symptoms of dyslexia. Children do not complain. Most parents just think their children are simply not too bright at school. Those children, who are referred for neuropsychiatric assessment of learning problems, receive a complex expensive report, which is perhaps useful for educators alone. Even so, with whatever specialist speech remediation is possible, little is achieved for most of these children over time. Most kids, who are not doing well at school, continue to not do well at school.
Recent research reported in AusDoc states that many children with language and learning problems are often labelled as simply badly behaved or as just slow. It is obvious from the statements that very few of these children are identified, much less treated. Access to treatment needs to be paid for, so very few children receive assessments much less treatments from physiotherapists or speech therapists unless such therapy is organised and run from within the educational system itself.
Evidence suggests that these children are very poorly managed by the current system.
I have labelled the specific child group I have observed as Paill Spectrum Dyslexia, in my model. This implies that they may be distinct group from other children with dyslexia. It may not even be the same condition at all. There may be multiple subclasses or subgroups within the dyslexia family category with separate causations. Long-term research will be needed to define this issue.
I only test children for Paill Spectrum dyslexia where I suspect that elements of the Paill Spectrum syndrome complex are present. The main test is a simple number recall test, full details are on the web site, but I will reproduce the information and some constructed results to exemplify. The tests take about 2-3 minutes and are important to serve as a marker for treatment response. There is a significant lag time between treatment and response of the condition to treatment. The issue is simply that once the causative agent as suggested by the Paill Spectrum model is treated, the child needs to “learn”, to recover. Back to Rationale Top
What other tests do you do? Dyslexia Test Sequence:
Symptoms on the Web Site: Potential List Of Causes:
Loss of balance: A list of Potential causes include
Each of these conditions has a characteristic group of symptoms and signs suggestive of the condition, predominantly suggested by the presenting complaint of the patient.
Most diagnosis is based on a diagnostic algorithm predominantly splitting the condition (loss of balance) into several subgroups. A possible algorithm may be Vestibular type pathology,
Neuropathic injury type patterns with pathology such as stroke suggesting motor disease and finally,
A group such as sensory pathology affecting sensory nerve inputs used by the body to maintain stability.
Gait assessment is a primary tool in determining the type of imbalance present.
Interestingly many patients never achieve a diagnosis as can be evidenced by patients referred in my practice to neurologists for an opinion as to the cause of their problems, no diagnosis being made and no treatment suggested. Back to Rationale Top
Chronic fatigue is a symptom with a broad range of differential diagnoses.
Possible causes include:
The Common form of Weight Gain in our society is attributed to eat too much (greedy) or exercise too little (lazy). Many of these patients may show signs of fatty liver or metabolic syndrome being appreciated as an underlying component of their illness. Different authors differ as to their opinion on the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome. The cause is listed as idiopathic.
Of course, many other disease causes are possible:
Medical therapy: effect or complication: Many medications for many conditions cause weight gain commonly. Examples include many psychiatric medications, steroid therapy (glucocorticoids), Diabetic Medications that increase appetite (e.g. sulfonylureas),
Causes of Jitters and Panics or Tremors:
The diagnostic algorithm for tremor is based on the type of tremor present. Fine tremors may be physiological or due to disease such as thyroid disease or anxiety. Different types of tremor are associated with cerebellar disease or with Parkinson’s disease.
A general Differential Diagnosis of Tremor includes:
Clinical presentation usually rapidly determines a likely clinical diagnosis.
Diagnosis of soreness in the body depends on the precise location or pattern of soreness in the body. A large number of orthopaedic syndromes, connective tissue disorders, ageing disorders including arthritis of many subtypes and other syndromes exist. Almost every medical system in the body may list soreness as a possible symptom.
In cardiovascular disorders, characteristic disorders with pain or soreness include: myocardial infarction, angina, variant angina, or pericarditis.
In respiratory disorders: possible syndromes causing soreness include:
Pharyngitis, sinusitis, bronchitis, bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, pleurisy, honeycomb lung, lung abscess, or granuloma. These conditions may be primarily infective (common) or secondary to some other process such as a neoplasm e.g. Mesothelioma, bronchogenic carcinoma or related to other conditions such as an immune disorder
Many infections either local or systemic may cause soreness in the body by a variety of mechanisms.
Gastrointestinal causes (of soreness) commonly receiving surgery include cholelithiasis, appendicitis, torsion, bowel obstruction (acute, subacute, chronic), pancreatitis, Diverticulitis, rectal conditions. Other causes managed medically include inflammatory bowel disease, gastroenteritis: viral or bacterial or protozoal, adhesive bowel disease, malabsorption syndromes with intestinal hurry
These symptoms are normally assessed in context with the patient’s clinical presentation.
Modern medicine has a good basis for the alleviation of symptoms. Just because a new model of disease is proposed, does not invalidate existing therapies, in providing symptoms relief to patients.
Generally, once familiar with a syndrome, clinical progress is easy to predict and to demonstrate to patients, their carers and to the doctor in assessing clinical symptoms, signs of illness and in blood tests following the progress of a diagnosis. Back to Rationale Top
What is a germ killing reaction?
The Paill Spectrum syndrome model suggests that an infective cause underlies the clinical symptoms. Rarely, patients appear to react to antibiotics with a flu-like syndrome. The distinction from antibiotic allergies can be made with careful clinical assessment. The reaction will fade over 1-2 weeks when the antibiotic therapy is continued as distinct to allergies where this course of action is not advised.
The term “germ killing reaction” is a standard term, seen in medical literature. I use it in the same context.
In conclusion, thank you for your interest in the Clinical syndrome, (Paill Spectrum)
which I have identified. The medical knowledge of the syndrome is presented as a
theory or “model.” The process of promoting my syndrome has been a long and
difficult process, and I would welcome any constructive suggestions or any further
assistance in promoting the syndrome to other medical practitioners.
:-|
CD Book Information
The CD Books are not currently available. (Planned release date is early 2008).
More information is available on Paill Spectrum in Dr. Andrew Xxxxx’s two CD Books:
The CD Book with much more specific medical detail is called CTC-DTM . This CD gives full detail on identification of symptoms, signs of illness as well as full detail on treatment.
CTC-PSS is a discussion on the development of the Paill Spectrum model and the treatment of Chronic Fatigue. A number of cases are included to teach identification of key symptoms & signs on medical history & examination. :-0 Back to Rationale Top 
Accessing Information
Downloadable Information files (zip = pdf +mp3), are available directly through the web site.
(File on the Download Page: approximately 12MB download). :-? :-O
Copyright AMT Pty Ltd
The Paill Spectrum Disease Model has been developed by Dr. Andrew Xxxxx. It will be some time before the knowledge of the syndrome becomes independently tested and accepted. Disclaimer
If you are doing research or wish to discuss an issue, please contact Trish Tindale at
Samuel St Medical
31 Samuel Street
Camp Hill, Brisbane, 4152, Australia.
Ph: 61 7 3398 6233
Fax.: 61 7 3398 6433 or email at
This Page introduces the rationale for the finding of the Paill Spectrum Syndrome & tells where information has been presented or released. The clinical assessment process provides evidence to suggest the syndrome model. A discussion of other possible causes or diagnoses that may be responsible for symptoms in the Paill Spectrum Syndrome is given.
Use the "Buttons Above" to navigate the site's main headings, or follow the Links Below.
.
.
.
.
. . 
.
.
.
.
.
