Paywalled at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21641846.2019.1580855 Sci Hub, http://sci-hub.tw/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21641846.2019.1580855
"A diagnosis of ME/CFS is based on the exclusion of other diseases due to a current lack of known biomarkers for the disease. " It is easy to make a positive diagnosis of ME, it is CFS and especially chronic fatigue that is a disease of exclusion. Biomarkers are not known for a lot of other diseases such as migraine and they are diagnosed by symptoms and signs. This sort of sloppy myth really annoys me. If they would start with what is happening in ME and work from there instead of starting with known problems they might make more progress. We keep getting, well they don't have this, they don't have that but if they would look at the things that make us different instead of concentrating on nebulous fatigue they might get on better.
It's easy to make a diagnosis of M. E if doctors knew anything about it.. But they don't. I totally agree with you @Mithriel... I've often thought there are other illnesses with no biomarkers such as migraine and they can be diagnosed. Id diagnose M.E in 10 minutes because I know what the disease is as I live it every day.
perhaps, its not a mitchondrial disease in the true "technical" sense. but myhill showed it may be infectious by blood transfer. they infected healthy blood with mecfs blood and it showed some similar effects plus lactate problems. were there other tests infecting mice/birds/parrots with mecfs blood/tissue ? what happened ? were the myhill findings refuted or confirmed ?
Thanks for the link to the paper @Andy Reading this I am drawn again to the plasma exchange experiments by Stanford on the nano-needle and Oxford/Karl Morten on the muscle cells. Those are pointing to something in the patients blood either being present or not being present that is causing the energy issue in cells. That's the only reason I can see that the energy testing on cells only had been inconclusive. I really hope MRC funds Karl Morten - his team has some great leads that need following up on.
yes, @wigglethemouse with birds they seem looking at something like that, when i remember the story right... in the bird wasting disease PDD they first figured the borna virus, but birds didnt drop dead when infected. though, when tissue (brain) from ill birds was transferred, the healthy birds would die, too. some researchers identified misfolded prions, more popular seems the spiroplasma bacteria they have some trouble to show the bacteria in tests. ("Spiroplasma is a genus of Mollicutes, a group of small bacteria without cell walls") prions may not show in rna/dna test at all (?), perhaps something like spiroplasma neither ? im wondering, what davies and team (htester on phoenix) are really saying, when they couldnt find even "non human dna/rna". would things like prions/spiroplasma have shown ? they are infectious and detrimental.
In the United States, ME and CFS and ME/CFS (and SEID) are generally considered the same. ME and ME/CFS are becoming more common, while CFS and SEID seem to be declining in usage. Regardless, in the US, ME/CFS is no longer a diagnosis of exclusion. It is a differential diagnosis that can coexist with other conditions. Parkinson's is another example of a major disease without a biomarker.
Yep, sure looks like it, the title of the paper you linked is "Mitochondrial complex activity in permeabilised cells of chronic fatigue syndrome patients using two cell types", which is different to the one I linked.
Ok thanks Andy I was confused by the same authors I'll put it in a new thread New Thread: https://www.s4me.info/threads/mitoc...ndrome-patients-2019-tomas-newton-elson.8395/
This is a bit of an aside, but @Sunshine3, and @Webdog, thanks for the notations re diseases that don't have biomarkers. It would be interesting to have a list of diseases that medicine can diagnose without a biomarker. I keep saying MS does not have a single biomarker - the aha! "Here is the biomarker for MS in the blood!" With MS, more than one test needs to be done to confirm the diagnosis.
