Review [ME/CFS] from current evidence to new diagnostic perspectives through skeletal muscle and metabolic disturbances, 2024, Pietrangelo et al.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome from current evidence to new diagnostic perspectives through skeletal muscle and metabolic disturbances
Tiziana Pietrangelo; Stefano Cagnin; Danilo Bondi; Carmen Santangelo; Lorenzo Marramiero; Cristina Purcaro; Raphael Severino Bonadio; Ester Sara Di Filippo; Rosa Mancinelli; Stefania Fulle; Vittore Verratti; Xuanhong Cheng

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a demanding medical condition for patients and society. It has raised much more public awareness after the COVID-19 pandemic since ME/CFS and long-COVID patients share many clinical symptoms such as debilitating chronic fatigue. However, unlike long COVID, the etiopathology of ME/CFS remains a mystery despite several decades' research.

This review moves from pathophysiology of ME/CFS through the compelling evidence and most interesting hypotheses. It focuses on the pathophysiology of skeletal muscle by proposing the hypothesis that skeletal muscle tissue offers novel opportunities for diagnosis and treatment of this syndrome and that new evidence can help resolve the long-standing debate on terminology.

Link | Paywall (Acta Physiologica)

 

What do they say? Can anyone give me a copy?

 

I remember some of these Italian researchers did some interesting ME/CFS muscle research in the 2000s.
It's good to know they are still interested.

 

How can people keep claiming this?!

Sure, we don't know everything (or even enough), but this constant refrain of can't find the patho despite decades of research is a back handed way of hinting that there is no patho, because you know, it's all in our heads. Why can't they just say it's historically underresearched so we know very little about it, but this paper starts to rectify that situation?

 

@Hoopoe I've DM'ed.

 

This review is quite comprehensive. There is a little reference to psychosocial factors in parts of the paper, but this is a firmly biological review.

 

The argument obviously is used in this way by certain people, but that's on them--it's not inherent in the point or statement itself. I read it here as a neutral statement. Sure, they could have added that it's been historically under-researched but I don't see any problem with it as is.

 

A few quotes to frame the review.

Fatigue And Muscle Fatigue In ME/CFS

 

Oxidative stress in fatigue and ME/CFS

 

Well, I did just read the abstract and not the whole paper. I may have leapt to some conclusions!