Ah, thank you Dolphin, i was just beginning to wonder what definition he uses for diagnosing M.E. Im also interested to know why others dont also use this criteria, maybe they do but i would like to find this out. I think the idea of the new ICC criteria is to stop M.E from being a wastebasket diagnosis of exclusion and make it a positive diagnosis if you meet certain criteria. In the U.K it is on;ly by ruling things out and being left with nothing that you get a diagnosis of M.E or C.F.S. This has to be wrong when there are now so many proven abnormalitites that are similar in most patients.
Of course because we dont have adequte testing in most cases the chances of a missed diagnosis are high. I have read some work from a hospital ion Newcastle in the U.K that also found a high missed diagnosis rate and it is terrifying to think many of us could have a treatable illness that has been missed, they found a misse diagnosis rate of 40%
http://www.rcpe.ac.uk/journal/issue/journal_40_4/newton.pdf
Of course because we dont have adequte testing in most cases the chances of a missed diagnosis are high. I have read some work from a hospital ion Newcastle in the U.K that also found a high missed diagnosis rate and it is terrifying to think many of us could have a treatable illness that has been missed, they found a misse diagnosis rate of 40%
http://www.rcpe.ac.uk/journal/issue/journal_40_4/newton.pdf
I think everyone with complex health [problems should be fully screened in the way the Newcastle study and Dr Hyde do to find out what people really have.
Im concerned also that some of the abnormalities he is attributing to other diseases could actually be a part of the pathophysiology of M.E that is only now coming to light. How do we know that people with M.E dont have these other disorders more commonly as part of thier M.E An example of this is POTS. id i were diagnosed woith POTS or NMH in the U.K they would then say i couldnt have M.E as it is a diagnosis of exclusion.
So much to debate and think about here!
All the best, Justy.
So much to debate and think about here!
All the best, Justy.