- Messages
- 246
- Likes
- 411
Hi everyone, anyone.
I’ve searched to see if a similar thread has been posted in the past but haven’t found any. I have found some related but more specific threads which I will provide links to here.
Experimental early treatment plan
Early stage of M.E.
The benefits of early diagnosis
a few times I’ve heard people mention that perhaps different treatment should occur for those who have had cfs for a short time compared to those who have had it for a long time. Certainly if the virus is still there (assuming it was ever there and assuming people still have cfs after it goes away) you’d presume an antiviral treatment might be more value early?
And I’ve also seen an article that studied immune markers (cytokines I think), comparing those who have had cfs for less than three years to those who have had it for longer, finding that the immune system was potentially overactive at the start and under active later on (perhaps because it gets burnt out).
there is a supplement called cytokines suppress that is supposed to reduce inflammatory cytokines. The difficulty I have with this concept is that if the virus is still active then you probably don’t want to reduce the immune response? But if it’s not, and it’s just an autoimmune reaction, then you probably do want to reduce it, perhaps helping prevent it from burning out?
and, if there are treatment differences for short term vs long term sufferers (perhaps I should have used those terms in the thread title instead of early) then, for each treatment, how do you define early?
thoughts?
I’ve searched to see if a similar thread has been posted in the past but haven’t found any. I have found some related but more specific threads which I will provide links to here.
Experimental early treatment plan
Early stage of M.E.
The benefits of early diagnosis
a few times I’ve heard people mention that perhaps different treatment should occur for those who have had cfs for a short time compared to those who have had it for a long time. Certainly if the virus is still there (assuming it was ever there and assuming people still have cfs after it goes away) you’d presume an antiviral treatment might be more value early?
And I’ve also seen an article that studied immune markers (cytokines I think), comparing those who have had cfs for less than three years to those who have had it for longer, finding that the immune system was potentially overactive at the start and under active later on (perhaps because it gets burnt out).
there is a supplement called cytokines suppress that is supposed to reduce inflammatory cytokines. The difficulty I have with this concept is that if the virus is still active then you probably don’t want to reduce the immune response? But if it’s not, and it’s just an autoimmune reaction, then you probably do want to reduce it, perhaps helping prevent it from burning out?
and, if there are treatment differences for short term vs long term sufferers (perhaps I should have used those terms in the thread title instead of early) then, for each treatment, how do you define early?
thoughts?
Last edited: