Search results

No worries. When all is said and done, I agree with you. I'm just a worry wort who more often than not creates his own tempest. :)

Do we know that all people with ME/CFS have PEM? This is where I worry a bit about the definition thing. That the wrong or flawed definition informs studies the wrong way, at least potentially. And by extension, diagnoses. Studies should not emerge from disease definitions; it should work the...

Don't kids do this all the time to get out of taking tests?

I am embarrassed to feel a need to qualify this, but I'm going to anyway: I strongly believe PEM is a core feature of ME/CFS, maybe the core feature. As @Andy pointed out, for many of us it is arguably the most disabling. But I'm torn about this mandatory/definitional thing because both present...

History has taught us - as have medical politics - that this is fluid. Very little is concrete here because, as you allude to, we don't yet know the pathology.

Merged thread The Lyme Pandemic that COVID Uncovered https://www.lymedisease.org/members/lyme-times/2023-winter-health-science/similarities-lyme-covid/ Sigh.

So they appear to equate asthenic syndrome with CFS. I did not know what asthenic syndrome was, or I'd forgotten. Fun read if you enjoy reading about so-called anxiety neurosis. Which evidently we have, or need to have to fit their casting of the disease.

How many people aware of default labels like FND and MUS are unwilling to go to say, a neurologist, because they know, in today's cringeworthy medical world, there is a real possibility that their diagnosis not only gets kicked to the curb, but they get labeled instead with an appallingly...

I think the word "mental" should be retired. Too much damage has been done to it for it to be salvaged. ETA: And then there's the false dichotomy it keeps empowering.

I may be missing something obvious, but who will know? All of this - besides this forum and Cochrane and the IAG , how many will know? Enough for it to matter? If I'm Cochrane, this may be a closed loop as far as they are concerned.

@Mij, I'm not particularly fond of the potential it introduces to undermining the need or want for patient reporting. It's interpretive BEYOND the mangling of what can be done via questionnaires. Sorry, I'm mangling my words. It imo introduces an unnecessary third party risk, if that makes...

Among other things. It was first suggested by a vet.

Behaviour is one step removed from symptoms. Why qualify "sickness" at all? Worse, why qualify it with anything to do with behaviour; it's BPS chum.

A tandem infection where Rickettsia is one of the pair has concerned me for quite some time. Who tests for it, with what tests, and for which strains? The US is notorious for TBD's, but not many GP's look this way.

There's a Woody Allen movie in there somewhere.

FND is an in-your-face-Science! moment; you'd think there'd be more Scientists stepping forward in outrage to call out the fact that it exists. After all, it's an affront to to what Science strives for. It is unScience. My brain is struggling to find the words. I'm sure it's an "im" or "in"...

Sickness behaviour is not a symptom. It's a framework to infer disease, initially proposed by a veterinarian, if I recall correctly. :)

Mayo is a big deal, historically a tough nut. Hopefully it will get the attention of other medical bellwethers like Johns Hopkins.

Yeah, I appreciate I am likely in the minority, but the title here, imo, should have the word "Gender" in place of "Sex". Mitigates ambiguity for title surfers. But I'm one of those who still believes the word "none" must always be singular, so likely just another generational ship sailing away.

Dumpster diving. Garbage. So, no surprises.