Ok. Well. Done a bit of digging - trying to gain some better perspective. Found this on the 25% Facebook page: Posted on 20 September 2012 followed by: 91 comments followed including: Well it degenerates even more after that. I didn't know other UK charities even had a vote. Thought it would be a Scottish issue.... Sure there's far more to it than meets the eye. Seems that way to me. You know if I look back on my medical notes over the past 15 years I am pretty certain that those dreaded initials C.F.S. appear on my notes more than the 'preferred' M.E. What has been interesting is that even on the 25% Group's website they include CFS, same goes for Tyme's trust in the research they cite on the main page for immune abnormalities. Either we ARE talking about a preferred label, OR we are talking about a preferred criteria, OR we are talking about preferred research (that will include the dastardly 'CFS' criteria or at least will not be solely relating to 'ME' cohorts). Personally, I think different people are wanting different things based on different levels of understanding and that not everyone is aware of the issues or even of the research - let alone the history - or what it would take to overcome the (often) valid medical objections to changing (back) to Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. Finally, and then I'm done, if 'ME' is a subgroup based on something or other, then how can the same prevalence figures be cited by those purporting to support this notion? Even the ICCME does this.