I have a number of initial thoughts on this.
First, this is to be expected. Most doctors are not scientists, and too overworked and under-resourced to properly investigate. Most do not use evidence based practices, and are not inclined to. Indeed, there are disincentives to do so. Most, when asked about evidence based practices, will regurgitate simplified evidence based medicine slogans.
To expand on this, most doctors are conservative. They tend to protect the status quo.
Second, under some of the reasoning the field of psychiatry would disappear ... its even less validated than SEID. Where are the biomarkers? Which brings me to ...
They are conflating the lack of a diagnostic test for SEID, ME or CFS, with the lack of diagnostic tests for the pathophysiology. Its very embarassing to the medical profession that the three most important tests are 1940s tests (TTT, qEEG and CPET) and obvious, and available at large hospitals, and taught to doctors at good medical schools. So why have they spent more than half a century in ignorance of this? It must be galling.
They can dispute the validity of SEID as a disease entity. Join the club, I am not convinced either. Yet what cannot be disputed is the pathophysiology. So they are arguing from ignorance. Operating in defiance of the existing evidence is ineptitude.
As advocates we need to push the fact that most of the symptoms are verifiable in a patient with very old tests they should have been using for decades, and that the one remaining diagnostic symptom (sleep issues) has tests but reliability is in question. Most of the diagnostic criteria are capable of independent verification, patient by patient.
