Omg. More people need to know about this. Can you tell me how you know this?
My insurance doesn't restrict me from seeing new physicians, so I've talked with many physicians in Germany. 90% match the typical stereotype. The stereotype doctors from the FLCCC also "mock".
Do you think it's true in many countries?
The medical system works very similar in most countries. The reason for this is that underdeveloped countries usually just adapt the laws from developed countries because this is the best way for the industry to accept their laws and attract financial investors. This is the reason why more and more countries implement very strict pharmaceutical laws so that you need even permission from a physician to take harmless medications just because it's only approved for a less common disease. And you'll never get it prescribed because it's not in the guidelines. So it's probably true for most countries with international trade partnerships. To get trade partnerships with the EU or US, you have to adapt their "standards".
ME is diagnosed if the certain symptoms go on past 6 months. I don't know when the 6 month part of the diagnosis was added. My understanding is was not always that way. So people would go into studies only past 6 months right? Unless you mean also from further back when there wasn't a 6 month part of diagnostic criteria (when was that?).
Only if you're still an unresolved case. This is just the medical system and how it works. When someone has positive viral serology, no time will be "wasted" for further diagnosis. They will be diagnosed with the viral infection, they will get full immunological treatment. There are so many options that they will go through, many of which would likely work for CFS/ME as well, such as interferon therapy, lymphocyte transfusions or filtration, all kinds of antivirals. If nothing of this should help, they will label it "chronic treatment-resistant viral infection" and with this diagnosis, all the doors will open for a patient. No need to even consider CFS/ME from the perspective of the patient. They have a virus and this is serious. CFS/ME isn't serious, right?
So if people have viral serology after 6 months of onset then they don't go into studies?
They go into antiviral therapy studies.
How common is testing for viruses when a person reports that their symptoms came on months ago or that they haven't had acute infection symptoms in a while?
Testing is still common, but they won't count the months prior. The day of the diagnosis is what counts. Regardless, a prior infection will not turn out with positive IgM and without positive IgM there is no acute infection and without an acute infection, the viral infection will be excluded as a diagnosis. "You don't have a viral infection", they will tell you. No need to look for latent or abortive infections since most physicians don't even know this exists, not to speak of its diagnosis.
I mean besides mono are there any actual long infectious periods that doctors typically have a diagnosis for?
These exist. But they are diagnosed by ongoing infection markers. For EBV, it's called CAEBV (chronic active EBV). But this isn't the case for CFS/ME. It's not chronic active. It's chronic latent or whatever, and it might reactivate regularly but not show up in the late IgM antibodies because this kind of testing only works for the first initial infection. They won't look in the CSF on a regular basis either, in case there is something reactivating in the CSF or any other organ.
Can you elaborate on your thinking about nothing excluding ME?
Let's take another example, namely pre-diabetes and diabetes mellitus. Technically, diabetes mellitus includes the pre-diabetes diagnosis because it's just an advanced stage of the same disease. But you won't be diagnosed with pre-diabetes if you are diagnosed with diabetes mellitus. It's only the black and white thinking of medicine that you need exactly one diagnosis and everything else is just a distraction. So once you're cured of diabetes mellitus, you might still have pre-diabetes.
The symptomatic definition of diseases allows many overlaps. CFS/ME is an unspecific condition, so it overlaps with many diseases. It's just the black and white thinking of medicine that this isn't co-diagnosed, e.g. for long haulers who have it more than 6 months. If there was a causal-pathological definition of diseases, you'd really only have a single diagnosis given a single causality.
Both I would think rare but I don't know if doctors routinely check for non ebv viruses after months?
They might, out of pure lack of knowledge of the disease, re-check for it by late IgM antibodies, which can never come back positive if you don't have a severe immune deficiency. They might not recheck at all because they've been taught that you can't get a disease once you have positive IgG antibodies. They don't understand latent viral infections.
They probably get in trouble from higher powers like their registration body etc.
They think that based on outdated information. Based on the new evidence, there is no chance to face legal consequences. It's the same as with Ivermectin. Physicians are scared to use anything that isn't recommended in the guidelines, even if there is plenty of evidence to support it. And evidence is all that the court needs. But court hearings are also time-consuming and annoying. Of course, any physician tries to avoid it even if they think they are on the right side. Physicians aren't angels. It's just a job to them, in the end. A noble job, but still a job they don't want to risk losing. Even if it means discarding uncomfortable patients.
