• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Muscle and immune system dysfunction research in ME/CFS - two new studies (July 2016)

Marky90

Science breeds knowledge, opinion breeds ignorance
Messages
1,253
So this contradicts Julia Newton`s findings? Really important to narrow this down. Great stuff.
 

Marky90

Science breeds knowledge, opinion breeds ignorance
Messages
1,253
"This research project did not find any evidence of biochemical or metabolic dysfunction in muscle cell samples obtained from CFS/M.E. patients. This contrasts previous work that has reported muscle dysfunction in CFS/M.E. patients following exercise."

Well it seems pretty straightforward, the function of our sample muscle cells, does not differ from controls.
I guess the question still could be asked: How do they work in our bodies?
Their function might there be altered, as a downstream effect.
 

Wolfiness

Activity Level 0
Messages
482
Location
UK
Yes, does the new study contradict the old one or is it simply that they didn't find the cause of it where they expected?

The famous 20x Lactic Acid discovery was also in vitro, wasn't it?
 

Wolfiness

Activity Level 0
Messages
482
Location
UK
I think you're right, yeah, if it's this one -
https://www.researchgate.net/public...chronic_fatigue_syndrome_A_case-control_study

it does seem to be in vivo. Does anyone know what this paragraph means?
A large group of CFS patients consciously or subconsciously do not exercise when invited to and do not show bioenergetic abnormality as a result. Although exercise intervention is the logical treatment for the patients showing acidosis, future trials must exclude those subjects who do not initiate exercise as they will not benefit. Failure to do so potentially explains previous mixed results in CFS exercise trials.

Surely Newton is not saying we'd improve if we chose to exercise?
 
Last edited:

frog_in_the_fog

Test Subject
Messages
253
Location
California
My friends often invite me out for some exercise, the old brain thinks this will be great, but the new brain reminds me there will be hell to pay later. I often feel that I don't have free will anymore, my illness is in control most of the time.

So based on how I feel, I would tend to think that some of these studies wouldn't work out as expected.
 

panckage

Senior Member
Messages
777
Location
Vancouver, BC
Surely Newton is not saying we'd improve if we chose to exercise?
Well I think he's saying he's unsure if it will help us because as he believes the problem with CFS patients is they won't do the trial. Too high a percentage of us reject exercise so he can't say whether it will help us or no.

Well I propose the cure for CFS is to beat us with sticks. Nobody will volunteer for my trial so how can they say it won't help them? :p
 

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
With all the research into our mitochondria right now we can expect some validation or contradiction from research in the next year or two. However the evidence that energy production is diminished is very strong. That is a general finding, and does not tell us why.

If we are not making enough energy, but the mitochondria are fine, then we can look for other causes, such as hormonal or vascular. However I would like to see some kind of muscle pH probe etc., or some other way, of testing muscle cells post exercise. Did the current study put the cells under stress? At rest I do not expect to see any lactate or other issues in milder patients, regardless of which prior hypothesis we are talking about.
 

panckage

Senior Member
Messages
777
Location
Vancouver, BC
@panckage But she does mention ‘bioenergetic abnormality‘. Julia Newton did a study http://www.healthrising.org/blog/20...-muscles-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-reversible/ where she found different subtypes of abnormalities in the CFS patients she studied, some which she thinks may actually respond to exercise and some which wouldn't.
From reading it sounds like she doesn't know what she is talking about. Any improvement from things like GET have been small and are only indirectly related to CFS.

Exercise helps as long as it's not too much. This applies to healthy people as much as it does to us.

Any exercise treatment will get a positive result except for those who are too sick to exercise. Anyone too sick to exercise will just drop out of the study. These people can decrease the validity of your hypothesis but they cannot reject your hypothesis. With GET we assure you that your hypothesis can never be rejected!
- GET promotional literature
OK i give up trying to make that something coherent :rofl:
 

Wolfiness

Activity Level 0
Messages
482
Location
UK
She didn't specify an "ignore your body" GET approach. She might well have been talking about a "listen to your body" paced approach. I know some people do manage to increase their activities through pacing whereas I cannot. Until we find out what the problem is and how to define subtypes we just don't know why these variations exist.
 

panckage

Senior Member
Messages
777
Location
Vancouver, BC
@wolfita I was just responding to what I read in the article which quoted her saying some people with CFS improved with GET. That was the reason attributed to her on why she thought exercise helps some PWME
 

wastwater

Senior Member
Messages
1,271
Location
uk
It doesn't surprise me at all I don't think it has anything to do with muscles.
AMPK could still be relevant though.
 
Last edited: