What research do you want to see?

Sometimes i think the fight has to be taken to the problem, so in that vein research on why its so hard to accept scientific evidence and instead treat patients with harmful therapies and believe they are imagining their symptoms when there is clear evidence they are not.

 

I still like ramseys theory about m e being an atypical version of polio but that was politically unacceptable because of all that money spent creating the polio vaccines .I really don't understand the political reasoning behind that after all they created vaccines against 2 of the 3 viruses why could they not carry on and find one that worked on the 3rd polio causing virus. perhaps they did not care for the much smaller numbers involved cost/benefit ratio was probably to small.

 

it is far to complex for just one line of inquiry but any research that improves our understanding of how the human immune systems work and interact with other systems would be beneficial to every body not just people with m e . but on a more personal level I would like a definitive test that says this is the disease you have and more importantly ignorant jackasses in the medical profession would not be able to say it doesn't exist. at least then they would be forced to give you the best per patient palliative care .

 

1. Autopsies, looking at nervous system tissues.

2. Not sure how this would work, being able to monitor brain waves through out the course of a week, where a patient can concurrently document what is happening that can be synced with the recorded data.

ETA: Per #2, I go into strange cognitive states (coma-like) prior to and during crashes, sometimes these things happen as I fluctuate through out the day. When we are out of the house on "go" mode, this doesn't happen...I think a lot of research is not capturing the lived experience.

 

I feel similarly wrt onset being linked to not resting sufficiently during a trigger infection or otherwise. For me, the same set of acute symptoms occurred twice with a gap of several months between. The first time, I recovered within days. The second, I tried to get back to work and normal levels of activity before I was physically ready, and ME developed as a result.

I would be interested in research that looks at host metabolic responses during an infection as apart from mechanisms of pathogenic hijacking specifically in infections like EBV (or perhaps more practically in bacterial infections) that are documented to have increased rates of resultant ME/CFS, and if and how findings correlate to metabolic findings in an increased amount of research in this area of ME. I recognise how super broad and light this is on detail, and some of the obstacles.

I look forward to reading more of what others suggest. Interesting thread, @JohnTheJack.

 

1- biomarker
2- establishing subsets
3- large, international, multi-center cohorts studies
4- replication of the brain inflammation PET studies
5- auto-antibodies studies, large cohorts
6- auto-immunity
7- research surrounding POTS. Comparing POTS patients with and without ME
8- system biology
9- metabolomics- comparing metabolomics between different subsets.

 

I would like to find out why rituximab works for some people (it seems to work well for a small group) so that those it is likely to work for can benefit. I don't want to lose this as a blind alley just because overall, the larger trial didn't benefit most.

 

I want comprehensive neuroimaging studies, to once and for all replicate (or dismiss) the PET findings, plus earlier findings such reduced blood flow of the brain stem.

Then I want all this compared to other neurological conditions, so we can see what's unique and what isn't.

 

I’m not sure whether this is a complete misunderstanding of the scientific method, but it seems to be ridiculous how often an ME/CFS study comes out that is just ME/CFS patients compared to healthy controls.

The authors of the study then proclaim that they’ve found significant differences between the ME/CFS patients and healthy controls. Well of course there are. One aet is very ill and likely inactive and the others aren’t. There must be dozens of differences going on, but it feels like none of these actually help understand the illness more.

So perhaps more studies that compare to illnesses of a similar presentation or severity, of which we have more knowledge, that we can then start to piece together what might be the matter.

 

I would like to see more replication of Ron Davis' teams blood test where they 'turn healthy cells sick' and vice versa. But this seems to be an OMF only domain and no publications. I know JaimeS says this research is ongoing but am surprised that more people aren't looking into it.

eta: also Naviauxs work

 

Indeed, i want to know the identity of that molecule is that is causing the block. But i suspect Dr Davis needs more funding to chase it...

 

Bearing in mind I do not have ME.

I was in the RAF when I caught Glandular Fever at the age of 18 in the early 1970s. I gather other cases could be a lot worse than mine, but nonetheless I was hospitalised for 2 weeks, given 3 weeks sick leave, and put on light duties for some time after that. Pretty sure I was told to take things easy. So I think there was at least recognition there was a risk of relapse, and that avoiding over exertion was the best way to avoid it.

Given that Glandular Fever is something a percentage of people are known to relapse with, and given it is often an original trigger for ME, I wonder if there is any commonality between GF relapsing and ME? Could they be two different facets of a common disease mechanism. Would it be something worth investigating?

 

I would like any study that leads us to a biomarker and in particular a focus on immune dysfunction and metabolic markers ....but while we are waiting for this:

I would like studies that properly determine prognosis of getting worse or staying the same based on onset type, symptom pattern and a better measure of disability than the rather crude measurements we have at the moment.

I would also,like a comprehensive study on prevalence of Comorbid conditions to allow guidelines to be drawn up for symptom based treatments while we wait for an M.E. treatment

 

Autopsy studies. With all tissues accessible, and sufficient money and effort, it should be possible to figure out what is going wrong and where in a sufficiently large number of patients.

Combined metabolism and CPET studies should enable development of a biomarker for PEM.

Since we all need treatment right now, I would like to see some studies into uncontroversial treatable comorbidities with the goal of creating treatment guidelines that actually improve the lives of patients. This would be very basic things such as salt loading, supplemental stomach acid, food intollerances and the respective elimination diets, etc. What treatments are helpful right now?