Neuroinflammation in Patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/55/6/945/F3.expansion.html
Hi All
Im writing this due to the recent IOM suggested name change to SEID. I guess they decided to change the name due to lack of evidence of inflammation...?
I know the trial posted above was only based on 9 CFS/ME patients - but having reviewed it - apart from a increase in sample size - I cannot understand how it could have been much better as an example of neuroinflammation in CFS and ME:
Between 45% and up to 199% increase in microglial activation levels from control to patient (depending on brain area)
Fairly clear correlation between reported symptoms via questionnaire and recorded brain inflammation levels...This to me is a really key point I think the medical profession ought to reflect on. There is evidence for a physical marker which increases in line with a patients reported fatigue and illness levels...in a climate of disbelief where psychiatrists are still sectioning patients - should this information not be shouted from the rooftops?
Its a little frustrating I think for patients when there is evidence like this however it seems the momentum of the medical system is barely bothered by it...and I KEEP reading about neurologists who state there is no evidence for inflammation...
It comes back to my question I made to Dr Shepherd - which is - how much evidence do you need to make a difference? In the western world we have to rely on small charity run studies and hard fought piecemeal government efforts...how long is it going to take to provide the quantity of evidence needed to make a real difference?
http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/55/6/945/F3.expansion.html
Hi All
Im writing this due to the recent IOM suggested name change to SEID. I guess they decided to change the name due to lack of evidence of inflammation...?
I know the trial posted above was only based on 9 CFS/ME patients - but having reviewed it - apart from a increase in sample size - I cannot understand how it could have been much better as an example of neuroinflammation in CFS and ME:
Between 45% and up to 199% increase in microglial activation levels from control to patient (depending on brain area)
Fairly clear correlation between reported symptoms via questionnaire and recorded brain inflammation levels...This to me is a really key point I think the medical profession ought to reflect on. There is evidence for a physical marker which increases in line with a patients reported fatigue and illness levels...in a climate of disbelief where psychiatrists are still sectioning patients - should this information not be shouted from the rooftops?
Its a little frustrating I think for patients when there is evidence like this however it seems the momentum of the medical system is barely bothered by it...and I KEEP reading about neurologists who state there is no evidence for inflammation...
It comes back to my question I made to Dr Shepherd - which is - how much evidence do you need to make a difference? In the western world we have to rely on small charity run studies and hard fought piecemeal government efforts...how long is it going to take to provide the quantity of evidence needed to make a real difference?