If you want to use the term SEID for a specific type of PEM, which you have, and to claim that this is a specific condition, or a symptom found in several conditions but worthy of investigation and treatment in itself, I won't argue - as long as the name ME is not sequestered for that group alone . . . .
PEM is specifically described by the criteria which require it for diagnoses. If someone doesn't have a symptom which is mandatory for a disease, then they don't have that disease. At most they might be said to have an atypical form.
If you know of an ME criteria which doesn't require PEM, then someone without PEM could be diagnosed with that. But they'd be talking about a different illness than everyone else here when they refer to ME or SEID.
1) How is such PEM diagnosed objectively?
It doesn't have to be. It's diagnosed subjectively based on the patient reporting immune and neurological symptoms triggered in response to exertion, typically hitting about 24 hours after that exertion.
2) If on delayed VO2 Max, what if PEM is recordable after say 6 hrs or 12 hrs but no longer after 2 days? Is that still PEM?
Probably - actual onset and duration varies from patient to patient, and even from crash to crash. But the main point is that it is delayed. Symptoms starting during exertion, or very soon after, are exercise intolerance, but probably not PEM, especially without the immune and/or neurological symptom flair. Many people do not appreciate this distinction, and end up diagnosing ME/CFS when it's not appropriate.
3) What of sufferers diagnosed with ME who do not show problems on VO2 max but are symptomatic for PEM?
The two-day CPET is a relatively new area of research regarding ME/SEID, so it's possible that it would miss some actual PEM. But I'd think it's more likely that someone in that situation is confusing exercise intolerance or delayed-onset muscle soreness with PEM. This happens most often when the emphasis is placed upon fatigue, and immune and neurological symptoms are ignored or downplayed.
4) If it is a symptom found in numerous conditions e.g. as a consequence of different active infections, is it better seen as such or as a condition in itself or as organic proof of underlying e.g. infection?
A symptom is just a symptom. I would be difficult to see it as a disease unto itself when everyone who has it also has numerous other symptoms in common. But it's a symptom which is seen in no other disease beside GWS - which is probably just ME/SEID with a specific onset, since it has the same symptoms.
Fatigue is massive among ME/CFS patients. That is just the truth.
I disagree. I usually don't feel "fatigued". I often feel sick during PEM, or light-headed due to OI, but I don't get this general non-specific fatigue. My symptoms are accounted for by more specific descriptions.
Perhaps I am mistaken but it seems to me that some, who most vociferously (and correctly) advocate the drawing of clear diistinctions between ME and depression as conditions, seem, albeit tacitly, to be ready to push people like me down the "you've really got depression" route, despite our ME consistent symptoms being our primary problem. I may be wrong but that is how it seems and it is highly ironic.
Not in the slightest - there are many alternatives to having ME or depression. The problem is that sloppy diagnosis convinces some patients that they have ME despite not fulfilling the criteria, and those patients are then denied proper diagnostic tests and treatment. It also gets rather awkward when misdiagnosed patients with any physical or psychological illness claim to be ME patients who are helped by things which are useless or harmful to ME patients.
And please understand that when someone equates ME with fatigue and sleep problems, it feels like they're trying to redefine our disease and deny our reality. Fortunately the disease criteria are pretty clear in that respect, unless using Oxford or Fukuda, both of which are pretty whole-heartedly rejected by the ME community and ME specialists.
According to my lab results I also have problems making energy in a variety of ways and for a variety of reasons.
There are no mitochondrial/ATP type lab results which can be used to diagnose ME/SEID at this point. They certainly do not substitute for the actual presence of PEM.
I could tell you more or less exactly over 30 years what type of PEM symptoms I have had - immediate, delayed by several minutes, encompassing days, more short-lived. All imo best described by the term PEM. No better term imo. I am not the "I feel like I have flu" type of ME patient. But I only had flu once when well. So my PEM may be less "fluey" than others', because of my genotype perhaps, and more like "lie down now" physical exhaustion. But, nevertheless imo PEM. None of them felt like depression.
This does not sound at all like PEM - it should not be occurring mere minutes after exertion, and flu-ish symptoms are part of PEM. If someone's reaction to exertion doesn't have the described PEM delay, nor the described PEM symptoms, it seems like a poor choice to label that reaction as PEM.
Additionally, the "lie down now" experience is a common part of orthostatic intolerance (OI), which does often feature exercise intolerance. ME patients usually have OI in addition to PEM, but it's pretty distinct from PEM, though there can be some confusion because the exertion (sometimes just standing up) can trigger OI immediately, then PEM later. OI is also present in many other diseases, which can be a good reason to continue investigating the diagnosis. And it's usually very treatable.
We may have much in common. I have not done 2 day V02 max for PEM, but 50% of those tested on one trial,who had a diagnosis of ME/CFS did not either. Is this test sensitive enough?. Does it reliably test PEM or only by circular definition, that those who have problems on this test have "real" PEM and the others don't, despite having long standing ME/CFS consistent symptoms with definite post exertional exacerbation of symptoms?
Maybe some people have central PEM and some peripheral muscle based. Maybe some have heart involvement in a way others don't. All might still fit the classic ME/CFS of CC/ICC but be different in crucial ways. It all needs sorting out thoroughly.
Thus far it seems to select for those who have typical delayed, flu-like PEM. It's circular to the extent that that is the symptom which these patients report, and which is required in the disease definition. Some people have it, some don't. Those who do have PEM have a lot more in common with each other than they do with people who don't have PEM, so it makes sense to group them under a disease name and criteria - it is certainly better than making the definition so broad that people with very different illnesses are included.
It's not a matter of being meanies and excluding people who don't fit in. It's a matter of defining a disease and finding common pathology and treatments. If the disease includes everyone with any exercise intolerance, there will be many different pathologies and treatments. Some people with exercise intolerance benefit from gentle exercise, whereas others are made incredibly sick from any exertion. Nothing is gained by combining these groups together, and much is lost.