Multifaceted mitochondria: moving mitochondrial science beyond function and dysfunction, 2023, Anna S. Monzel et al

The authors argue that the commonly used terms 'mitochondrial function and mitochondrial dysfunction' do not do justice to the diverse mitochondrial features, activities, functions and behaviours within the cells, and thus call for the field to adopt more specific terminology in the context of mitochondrial biology.

Abstract
Mitochondria have cell-type specific phenotypes, perform dozens of interconnected functions and undergo dynamic and often reversible physiological recalibrations. Given their multifunctional and malleable nature, the frequently used terms ‘mitochondrial function’ and ‘mitochondrial dysfunction’ are misleading misnomers that fail to capture the complexity of mitochondrial biology.

To increase the conceptual and experimental specificity in mitochondrial science, we propose a terminology system that distinguishes between (1) cell-dependent properties, (2) molecular features, (3) activities, (4) functions and (5) behaviours. A hierarchical terminology system that accurately captures the multifaceted nature of mitochondria will achieve three important outcomes.

It will convey a more holistic picture of mitochondria as we teach the next generations of mitochondrial biologists, maximize progress in the rapidly expanding field of mitochondrial science, and also facilitate synergy with other disciplines. Improving specificity in the language around mitochondrial science is a step towards refining our understanding of the mechanisms by which this unique family of organelles contributes to cellular and organismal health.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s42255-023-00783-1

 

Really not an expert at all but I will say it would be useful if this provides a better terminology framework for describing when mitochondrial function is affected and yet (given it is one of those 'tropes' people are primed to think we are stupid enough to be meaning) the mitochondria aren't themselves 'broken'.

Which sort of seemed to be what the Davis nanoneedle experiment was showing when they put healthy cells into ME/CFS plasma for example. I sort of think of that as being like when you do that experiment of putting a burning whatever flame into a test-tube of nitrogen in chemistry, or throw a car onto a flooded road. The what stops working/happening isn't the 'cause', and when you are trying to explain complex patterns of symptoms or phenomena these terms are really pretty important for us not to be left open to those who are focusing on priming others into ignorantly mocking us as if we've said different things ie whose focus seems to have been on building the highest communication barrier possible with HCPs.