Ravn
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
The assumption that there's only one ME/CFS is maybe a reason we haven't made much progress. Let's not search for that one perfect biomarker or explanation that fits all cases, let's search for subgroups that make sense and fit into a coherent picture.
For as long as we don't know if there are ME subtypes - and currently we have no idea - we need to think about ME in both ways. That is whenever we're considering a proposed mechanism we need to think through very carefullyI actually think it is the other way around. The idea that MECFS has multiple subtypes have been hindering the progress, imo, as such notion allows people to propose and explore theories that does not explain all phenomena.
1) what observations/data the proposed mechanism can and cannot explain if ME is a single disease with a single subtype and
2) what observations/data the proposed mechanism can and cannot explain if ME is several diseases/subtypes
Many hypotheses only attempt one of the two, and only for the 'can explain' part, even fewer pay much attention to the equally crucial "cannot explain" bit
It's difficult to keep so many what-if balls in the air all at once but for now it's important to keep our thinking open and flexible. Constantly move between investigating something in detail then stepping back and looking at how the detail fits into various larger what-if scenarios, based on that go back to detail, step back again and repeat until the puzzle comes together
I wish more people had that attitudeI'm not married to any theory, however; I'm always ready to drop any theory at any evidence that is to the contrary