In a public Facebook note, Danny Ze-dog addresses the flaw from many angles, and then explains how the IOM committee could easily fix the problem. The essay begins:
"There is a serious flaw in the premise and design of the Institute of Medicine's new ME/CFS definition. In a nutshell, the new definition lacks any exclusion criteria or even differential diagnostic suggestions to guide clinicians in making accurate diagnoses. This is a surprising omission that could render it, in practice, highly non-specific, and thus ultimately detrimental to patients both with and especially without ME or CFS who appear to meet its criteria. In this post I'll discuss some of the real world implications of this flaw, and how it might (easily) be corrected."
https://www.facebook.com/notes/849911435058362/?pnref=story
"There is a serious flaw in the premise and design of the Institute of Medicine's new ME/CFS definition. In a nutshell, the new definition lacks any exclusion criteria or even differential diagnostic suggestions to guide clinicians in making accurate diagnoses. This is a surprising omission that could render it, in practice, highly non-specific, and thus ultimately detrimental to patients both with and especially without ME or CFS who appear to meet its criteria. In this post I'll discuss some of the real world implications of this flaw, and how it might (easily) be corrected."
https://www.facebook.com/notes/849911435058362/?pnref=story