This looks interesting, but i'm unsure that due to the diagnostic criteria, if any answers will ever be found?
The best we can hope for is a subset of patients have X, Y, Z.
However, this does not prove that ME is caused by X,Y,Z, because ME frustratingly is referred to a CFS and due to heterogenous consequences of this, 'most' won't have X,Y,Z if they don't have ME!
Unfortunately, CFS or 'CFS/ME' (UK label) requires no biological abnormalities at time of diagnosis, or abnormal neurological signs. As the diagnosis (based on a hypothesis by Dr Melvin Ramsay) of ME is meant to describe a unique neurological disease, this biobank idea seems rather wasteful to collect 'unexplained chronic fatigue' blood, being none the wiser who has ME and who doesn't.
I wonder then, if time is better spent actually attempting to select ME sufferers first, and then do a bio-bank model on these 'likely ME patients'?
This would seem the logical thing to do, but to my knowledge, has never been done because of the 'chronic fatigue based' criteria in use in the medical profession. I would also imagine obtaining grant funding and using university facilities would then also be prevented if an 'ME' biobank was ever proposed due to medico politics and influence of certain people we know and love.
We have the best of a bad situation. I don't know if we should be satisfied though. I doubt any scientist would be. Sadly, this is the hallmark of CFS/ME biomedical research. Disinterest, because of the poor science, and the science if poor because of the criteria the CDC created and the UK espouses as adequate.
It seems bizarre that very sick patients and well meaning researchers are caught in a catch 22 scenario that interferes with good science research.