Reanalysis of: Imaging localized neuronal activity at fast time scales through biomechanics

The result of our reanalysis is that neither the data nor the statistical analysis by Patz et al. support the interpretation given by the authors, namely that neuronal activity was detected in their experiments. First, our main concern is the unusual choice of thresholding the computed statistic at |z|>1 corresponding to a significance level of p=0.32, which is much higher than the commonly used significance levels between 0.05 and 0.001. Second, the group analysis is based on the selective use of data not reported in the article. Third, there are two false statements made in the paper with regard to the absence of ‘activation’ in the control condition and in the viscosity measure (G″), respectively.