People have said this before, but CPET can make patients worse, which is why it isn't used more widely.
There does seem to be increasing evidence that would support two-day CPET as demonstrating a difference in ME/CFS patients to healthy controls. I'm not sure we're quite at the stage of saying it's a useful biomarker - we would need more data to replicate what has been discussed so far, plus wider testing of health conditions to demonstrate the second day drop-off as being truly unique to ME/CFS (though I believe some has already been done). And, as @adambeyoncelowe notes above, it's not a great biomarker if the test itself can make the patient (permanently?) worse: it's a bit like testing for a potential aneurysm by giving the patient drugs to raise their blood pressure to see if it bursts... 'Yep, we've confirmed the aneurysm. Sadly the patient died, but at least we've got a result!'. OTOH, it does at least provide objective evidence against the Tinkerbell view of ME/CFS.
I'm really glad they got NIH funding, it all sounds like useful stuff and very interesting. I'm looking forward to publications. On a side note - I like that Dan Peterson is still sticking in there with us - not a quitter. He's going to need an "I told you they were sick!" t-shirt.
This presentation is very similar to the one she made at the OMF symposium last year, in fact i bet its the same presentation with some updates I have to admit this made me laugh
She talks, in part, about extracellular vesicles, which was recently the subject of this thread here,https://www.s4me.info/threads/jesús...icles-as-potential-biomarkers-in-cfs-me.3214/
Spike Milligan's gravestone says (in Irish): 'I told you I was ill.' (Dúirt mé leat go raibh mé breoite.)
