I’ve long thought I had "moderate" ME/CFS, because I don’t have brain fog, I don’t have pain, I don’t have severe OI (though I do have moderate OI or POTS [not sure which! Or they may be the same?]).
But my energy production is severely curtailed and I crash regularly if I am not very very careful (which I try to be of course), and I get sick every time I crash, without fail. (And sick in between too ...), and my NK function is quite low too.
That is very interesting, because when I was contemplating the Myhill, Booth and McLaren-Howard theory of energy metabolism dysfunction in ME/CFS, my thoughts were that a defective energy metabolism could well be the central pathophysiology in ME/CFS, but that there might also be other pathophysiologies simultaneously going on in ME/CFS, such as low level chronic enteroviral brain infection (perhaps a cause of brain fog), chronic viral muscle infections (perhaps a cause of muscle inflammation and muscle pain), or virally-triggered autoantibodies (perhaps a cause of POTS or orthostatic hypotension).
So maybe these other symptoms of brain fog, pain, or orthostatic intolerance symptoms do not necessarily stem from just the energy metabolism dysfunction, but arise from viral infection/autoimmunity (but perhaps are worsened by the energy shortage).
You’ve managed to explain some rather complex concepts in a very well organized, comprehensible form - you’ve done us all a great service!
Pleased that you found it useful. But I think the credit has to go to Myhill, Booth and McLaren-Howard for developing such an incisive theory of ME/CFS. I don't know why this theory did not get the attention it deserved when it was first published in 2009. It will be very interesting, as new study results come in (such as Fluge and Mella's current in-depth investigations into ME/CFS metabolism), to see how the latest ME/CFS metabolic findings fit in with Myhill et al's original theory of ME/CFS energy metabolism dysfunction.
I am increasing my daily d-ribose from 5 mg to 15. Several years ago I was taking 10 mg. a day and then cut back, partly trying to save money, partly thinking I’ve been taking it for so long, I must not need it as much any more - but I think I was wrong on both counts (and of course it was a false economy. I’m also going to try taking extra when I’m crashed and see what happens.
After reading the Myhill, Booth and McLaren-Howard theory of PEM, my hunch is that increased D-ribose may be particularly helpful at times of increased energy expenditure and when PEM subsequently appears, because their theory states that PEM results when you have actually physically lost a large amount of your ATP/ADP molecules, as these molecules get broken down and are flushed out of the body in the urine. Normally the ATP/ADP molecules are constantly recycled by oxidative phosphorylation in the mitochondria, so you don't normally lose them.
Thus during PEM, D-ribose should in theory be particularly helpful, as D-ribose can be used to manufacture some brand new ATP molecules (by de novo synthesis of ATP), which are desperately needed during PEM.
By the way, there are some good prices for bulk D-ribose powder on
PureBulk.com and on
BulkSupplements.com.
So then I read in your post that oxidative phosphorylation involves recycling ADP to ATP, by adding phosphate to ADP. Which could explain how my phosphate tanked when taking the extra CoQ10. It all made sense. Whew! So I am going to try increasing my CoQ10 again, gradually, but also while keeping a close eye on phosphate levels.
Interesting thought! That is certainly worth exploring. The Myhill et al papers do talk about a possible shortage of inorganic phosphate (Pi) in some ME/CFS patients, but I believe this tends to be the Group A2 patients (who Myhill et al say may also have a shortage of Krebs cycle substrates, as well as Q10, NADH and magnesium shortages — see
Myhill 2012).
You are definitely not a Group A2 patient though, because to be Group A2 patient you first of all have to have oxidative phosphorylation running normally (and yours is running under par), and secondly you need to have higher than normal (super-normal) values of Translocator Protein In (whereas you have a low value of 0.25). Just a reminder that the patient groups are detailed in
this earlier post.
It might be an idea though to try taking some phosphate / phosphorous supplements with your Q10, to see if that helps.
Your recommendation of a drug or supplement which could affect the cell membrane in order to block the autoantibodies from getting into the cell made me think of NT Factor which is supposed to repair cell membranes.
Yes, the NT Factor is supposed to affect the cell membrane. So is the VegEPA® supplement that Professor Bassant Puri's studies found was helpful for ME/CFS in some patients — I have some VegEPA on my shelf to try, but have not got around to trying it yet.
By the way, the finding in your
Mitochondrial Translocator Protein Study of
lanolin potentially blocking your translocator protein may be worth following up on. Lanolin gunking up your translocator protein could in part explain your low Translocator Protein In value of 0.25.
My understanding is that when the substances blocking the translocator protein are addressed, this can lead to improvements in ME/CFS symptoms.
The lanolin potentially blocking your translocator protein would, I think, probably come from cosmetics such as skin moisturizers. So you could try switching to
lanolin-free products, and seeing if that helps.
One further point: I think I have figured out what the "15/100" figure that Dr Myhill wrote at the bottom of your ATP Profiles test results mean: I believe this 15% figure refers to where you are calculated to be on the Bell CFS Disability Scale, given the MES value of 0.11 that you have.
The 15% figure can be determined by looking at where your MES value of 0.11 (the purple line) intersects the diagonal dotted line in the figure below (the same figure that I posted earlier), which you can see is around 1.5 (= 15%) on the horizontal axis of the graph:
Above originates from
figure 4a in Myhill, Booth and McLaren-Howard's 2009 Paper.
In
this post on another thread, someone else uploaded their ATP Profiles test results, and they had a MES = 0.40, which when you look at where 0.40 intersects the diagonal dotted line, it works out as 4 on the horizontal axis, ie, 40% on the Bell CFS Disability Scale, which is why I believe Dr Myhill has hand written a "40/100" figure at the bottom of the page.