So would you say that if IgG rises anove 2000 but you don't have shingles it's meaningless? Because I can't sort it out if this was a reactivation when I became bedridden or a meaningless high titer.
From what I understand from reading various sources, high VZV IgG in an antibody test does not tell you much about the state of VZV in your body, and whether this virus has become reactivated in the dorsal root ganglia (its normal home).
It is only the appearance of shingles blisters that is a good indication of reactivation (even if it is only one or two tiny blisters). I don't know why antibody tests are not a good guide for VZV reactivation, because I could not find info on that.
But if you find any more information on this, or information to the contrary, please let me know, because I found it hard to find information on this subject.
I mention the story in the first post of Dr Chia's severe ME/CFS patient, who he had been seeing for nearly a year. It was only when he noticed just two tiny shingles blisters on her skin that he was alerted to VZV reactivation. Presumably if there were a blood test that was a reliable way to test for VZV reactivation, Dr Chia would have already given that test.
So when he found these two tiny shingles blisters, he have the patient some regular acyclovir, and within weeks she was back to full time work.
For me, the extraordinary thing about these rare cases of VZV-associated ME/CFS is the speed in which recovery occurs after being given antivirals. When we compare to EBV, CMV or HHV-6 virus-associated ME/CFS, Dr Lerner found improvements in symptoms from antiviral therapy take a year or more to fully manifest, and usually the patient does not recovery, but just gets a bit better.
My interpretation is that VZV ME/CFS may be due to a classical acute/reactivated viral infection, which antivirals are good at quickly addressing.
Whereas ME/CFS linked to EBV, CMV or HHV-6 may involve unusual forms of infection, such as the abortive infections that Dr Lerner proposed were driving ME/CFS, which do not respond directly to antivirals. Lerner says antivirals only work for abortive infections by indirect methods (addressing any reactivated infection which co-exists with the abortive infection).