So can't this test already be used to show that something is wrong?
Its one of the most common tests in several variations right now. However some patients collapse after this test and do not recover in reasonable time ... possibly years. This includes the 2 day CPET and invasive CPET tests.
We already know many things that are wrong. That is not enough. We need to be able to show things that are wrong in tests every doctor can order, or do in the clinic. The hundreds of well validated biomarkers, and thousands in the process of being validated, have not so far had an impact at the general clinical level.
The reason why cellular impedance is possibly useful is its a very cheap test that doctors can do in their own clinic.
I wish the two CPET versions I mentioned were used more often. They should be. The basic technology is from 1949, but the repeat CPET was not demonstrated in ME until 2007.
The first useful test for ME dates back to 1940, though it was not validated till 1995. That is the tilt table test for orthostatic intolerance, a common symptom in ME. Its not diagnostic though. It is however treatable. Yet despite more than half a century the majority of doctors do not use it in ME. This test can have risks though, I went into cardiac arrest in mine.
The next useful test is from 1946, the quantitative EEG. Its in the process of being investigated. I want this test myself as its largely non-invasive.
There are a bunch of other tests too.
Once we establish treatment biomarkers then we need easy and safe tests to monitor treatment. Right now one of those might be a metabolomic panel, particularly if the metabolic trap hypotheses are demonstrated and treatments are made available.
Trying to figure out why the medical profession has ignored more than half a century of advances is complicated, and there is much debate on this.