Conversation

If a ME/CFC diagnostic test has to be made available, what success rate of separation of CFS from non-CFS patients do you expect realistically?
  • 50-70%
    20%
  • 70-90%
    47.6%
  • 90-100%
    32.4%
466 votesFinal results
30
90
Replying to
I still don't understand how we differentiate general fatigue from CFS. I see lots of people claiming fatigue, but they are still working, etc, which to me see seems like something else.
7
2
Replying to and
I agree with the other replies, PEM is the difference. My first time on the merry-go-round I managed to return to work full time. I was lucky and my threshold for triggering PEM increased over ~3yrs until I was about 90% well. I could still trigger PEM, but it took more to do so.
1
1
Replying to
That's a million dollar question for which I do not have any full proof answer. At this moment I am working with patients who are evaluated at different German CFS centers by specialists and are officially diagnosed as CFS. So that means we are working with blinded samples.
4
24
Show replies
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Replying to
That's sounds great to me, certainly an improvement on the status quo. If I understand correctly: - a 25% false negative in mild CFS - a 10% false positive in controls (if they have EBV) Thank you so much for your persistence & innovation. & patient engagement
1
4
Show replies
Replying to
Thank you for your hard work. I suspect disease progression is important when using the diagnostic test. Perhaps damage is not significant enough to be detected at mild cases. (I may be talking nonsense).
5
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Replying to
May not possible. It will be puzzling to think why we humans have actually learnt to live with herpesviruses almost for our entire life. Is it actually beneficial? Is not it true that we feel the full force of these viruses, when we take them out from latency.
1
6