It could be a change in lungs, altering oxygen availability maybe.
Or in the power of heart contraction maybe.
Or provision of fuels by the liver maybe.
I am absolutely sure it is not a change in the lungs.
It is not provision of fuels by the liver, we would see different hormonal responses (insulin, cortisol) if that was the case.
A reduction in the ability to drive the heart due to metabolic factors may limit VO2Max (and cause chronotopic incompetence), but this cannot explain the reduced power at the ventilatory threshold.
I have discussed previously:
The reduced power at the ventilatory threshold can ONLY be explained by increased fatigue-sensing type III/IV muscle afferent feedback and the first ventilatory threshold. Notably this threshold is always coincident with the non-linearity in the reported sense of *****muscular***** effort on the Borg scale during the CPET too (in all participants not just ME/CFS patients). This level of exertion is still way below VO2Max and so participants are far from being out of breath at this level of exertion.
This also matches the experiences reported in this thread, eg. the "lactic acid" feeling is caused by that muscle afferent stimulation.
So the real question is if it is due to a sudden drop in metabolic efficiency leading to increased feedback generating metabolites, or increased nerve sensitivity of these specific afferents, or perhaps both. If it is a metabolic problem, is this problem in the muscles, or is it a problem of oxygen availability? (and there could be related issues with stimulation of autonomic nerves)
Note that the afferent feedback has both attenuating and excitory aspects (this is an important point as the NIH intermural study researchers fundamentally did not understand this) - there is a generalised reduction in motor cortex excitability due to afferent feedback, however there is also spinally mediated excitory effects that adjust the sensitivity of specific motor units as a compensatory mechanism, allowing for increased turnover of use of motor units as they fatigue as well as an overall compensatory increase in excitation to overcome the reduction in motor cortex excitability during fatiguing tasks.
Note that the altering the motor unit recruitment patterns itself can alter muscular metabolic efficiency - there is a spectrum of capillarisation density, O2 transport latency, mitochondrial density etc) and as the recruitment of motor units during a fatiguing task shifts towards fresher but less efficient (in terms of O2 consumption) motor units.
So there is a negative feedback loop whereby lower metabolic efficiency leads to greater fatigue that leads to greater afferent feedback that leads to (compensatory) altered motor unit recruitment patterns (higher threshold groups that have a lower balance of O2 consumption) and so on.
There may be different underlying causes in different ME/CFS patients, I don't assume the underlying pathology is the same in all patients, simply that there is a common factor (persistent and prolonged stimulation of those particular muscle afferents)
Note this also means the effect of afferent feedback can vary based on the task and muscle group that is used. We should not assume there is exactly the same effect in every muscle group or task because the degree of afferent feedback, balance between positive and negative excitory effects, particularly the effect on motor cortex excitability for example, depend on the overall metabolic demand that the muscle group can place on the body - measuring the finger or thumb might have poor sensitivity compared to large muscle groups in the body.
Grip strength during PEM may be reduced, but this is a symptom of altered motor cortex excitability, not the cause of that altered excitability. What new information does it really provide? You can ask the patient if they are experiencing PEM or not.
All sorts of routes seem to lead to an experience that looks like the PEM from muscular exertion - those routes include mental effort, strong emotion and exposure to sensory stimuli including light, smell, sound and touch. So I'm wondering whether we should be looking for something upstream of the muscle.
The brain has it's own parallel system of sensing metabolic state and regulating vascular responses ("neurovascular coupling"). The brain requires a lot of energy/oxygen during intensive tasks and it makes sense that it would have it's own metabolic fatigue sensing mechanism that serves a similar function to that of large muscle groups. And the hypothesis is that problem could go wrong in the brain for the same reason it goes wrong in the muscles.
I think a common experience is that PEM feels the same where it was triggered by physical or mental exertion.
We literally did a poll and found that ~80% of people people reported it did not feel the same.
https://www.s4me.info/threads/poll-physical-vs-cognitive-pem-same-or-different.16948/
For me, physical activity causes cognitive and physical PEM, whereas cognitive activity does not cause physical PEM, but only cognitive PEM.
@Jonathan Edwards mentioned that mental exertion uses little extra energy, so it probably doesn't fit with thinking triggering PEM through simple energy demand.
I think looking at the absolute calories used is the wrong way to look at it. That is the same mistake as Noakes and others who think fatigue is a result of the brain somehow calculating the overall metabolic consumption of the body and scaling back as a result: "Fatigue is a brain-derived emotion that regulates the exercise behavior to ensure the protection of whole body homeostasis." (Noakes 2012).
We know now that no such system exists (instead, fatigue is regulated by muscle afferents and the effects on the motor cortex) and going down that path of looking at overall energy consumption to explain fatigue sensation is a fool's errand.
The issue is the local metabolic capacity. When that capacity is exceeded, metabolites are generated that stimulate afferents (whether it be the metabolic fatigue sensing afferents in the muscles or the same thing in the neurovascular coupling systems in the brain). Instead of predicting a need for increased ventilation and reduced motor activity a-priori, the brain responds to afferents instead.
There have been studies that show that brain fog is associated with altered metabolism and altered blood flow in the brain, so I still think there is something there to dig into.
If brain cells were really short on ATP in ME/CFS then there ought to be some severe cases where you can measure specific mental deficits of the sort you can clearly identify in people with TIAs for instance.
The brain doesn't simply go "whoops, I ran out of ATP". Many things have to go wrong before that happens (and I'm not claiming to be an expert in emergency medicine) but the whole point about fatigue is it that it is part of a feedback mechanism that limits that from happening under normal functioning.
Yet the heart has to work all the time, pumping away.
Many moderate to severe patients suffer from chronotropic incompetence, so we cannot pretend the performance of the heart is not affected at all.
The heart consumes around 5% of VO2 at rest and is only working at around a tenth of it's (VO2Max) capacity. It has the highest capillarisation density compared to any skeletal muscle in the body. And notably, no scientific study discusses any sort of metabolic fatigue sensing afferent feedback (muscle pressor reflex) within the myocardium itself analogous to that of skeletal muscles.