Can this desensitization of adrenergic receptors be potentially reversed? It sounds like it could be core problem in sympathetic hyperactivity. Sorry I don't understand how biology works, please correct me
For that, the real mechanism would have to be known. Otherwise, you'd try to resolve the issue as per multiple theories in parallel. I currently use an adrenergic agonist, Butcher's Broom. It's not reverse but rather a compensation of the issue. If it even works at all, I can't tell because I'm taking so many things.
I dont think scientific knowledge is the most important thing. Insight is.
Overview is key. And it's not specific to this subject either. I had the same issue with the papers I've written in my own discipline. It sometimes happens so fast that your paper can be outdated before it's completed. If you don't keep yourself updated, you might publish something that already shows a contradiction right away.
I have the impression that certain members of this forum have the best overview among all scientists out there (I know - it might just be my own bias). It's good for us forum members to have such experienced minds available. Because we have time to figure out who to trust and in which regards. But the members of the scientific community who actively work on their own tasks don't have this time. How can they get an overview?
Normally, you'd expect overview papers that do this job. It's not that such overviews don't exist. Even this paper from Wirth and Scheibenbogen is supposed to give an overview. But which one really goes into depth?
I collaborated on a rolling overview project on COVID-19 for a short time because I had the impression that certain aspects of the disease pathology were commonly overlooked. You can imagine how much has been published on COVID-19. It's a full-time job and you're supposed to approve the whole paper in the end. That wasn't the reason I opted out though. Bias from the lead author was when it came to poor quality control of the contributions.
I'm wondering why such a project isn't possible with CFS/ME. I think it's necessary. We have MEpedia. But to medical folks, this isn't even a source, worse than Wikipedia. You need scientists behind such a project. Many and not a single author. And you need to eventually publish the updated versions so that they go through peer-review to give them credibility. I think the necessity for such a project is more valid than ever.
After Christmas, I'll write a post from my recent personal experience why I have the impression that the medical community is completely lost and that they are lost because they can't get an overview either. Not by reading a single paper. They don't know where to start, so they don't start at all but come up with their own unfounded ideas, based on personal anecdotal experience, that aren't helpful to any patient.