Hi Squeakycat -- I love the MSQLI suggestion. And I bet you could find controls matched the way you need them. But as soon as I read your concern, I started wondering whether the controls then needed to be matched for time, culture, etc. -- then I thought, wow, I'm getting into ridiculous minutiae that most studies never bother with. Of course the editor in me loves the pedantic nature of these issues.

About BNAC: I have to chime in with Johnson (the opinion! the chutzpah!). If you are studying a disease known to have an increased incidence in family members, even if the incidence isn't massive, you cannot consider family members to be healthy controls, because we do not know the source of the family predisposition. Lifestyle? A genetic issue? In which system, a primary straightforward one like an inherited collagen problem, or a hidden one like a tendency toward malabsoprtion in the mother that gives rise to the secondary symptom of malformed veins, etc.?
Hey girlgeek, you and I could have a great time at a museum. We could just keep coming back to the first exhibit, and it would all be so fresh and amazing.

But to me my cognitive problems are no different than visible physicial problems, and they should have the same compassion. Instead, many people get irritated and say things like . . . for god's sake, can't you just think . . . hurry up . . . try *harder* to get organized . . . repeat it *again?* . . . where's the list we just spent an hour making . . . how could you forget this, it meant so much to me . . . etc.
If we had the visual equivalent of a wheelchair for the brain, maybe people would get it.

Of course if I wore such a thing my middle school daughter would never be seen with me.

Anyway, this is one of the major things that got me excited about CCSVI -- reading that after Liberation, some people experienced a lifting of their confusion. That would be huge.
OK, I've had my moment with my invisible friends. Back to the family.
