FOUNDING PRINCIPLES AND M.E. SOCIETY
DEFINITIONAL FRAMEWORK -- DISCUSSION
M.E. Is Not Fatigue
1. Use of the word "fatigue"
either to name this illness or to describe this illness is erroneous.
Patients and patient groups who want to "change the name" must first take
responsibility accurately to describe the symptomatology. This is a
disease wherein extending beyond a certain threshold of activity leads to
severely disabling symptoms and physical dysfunctionality, possibly
resulting from low cardiac output (see our
Cardiac Insufficiency
Hypothesis page), symptoms which can be described in specific, accurate terminology without
reference to broad or demeaning terminology such as "fatigue" or "poor
stamina.” M.E. is a disease, and patients are sick, with often
excruciating symptoms that can be clearly articulated. The defining
characteristic of M.E. is that patients relapse with physical exertion and
develop disease progression and severe physical dysfunctionality with continued physical exertion. Hence, the
defining characteristic is exercise intolerance, post-exertional muscle
weakness, generalized weakness, faintness, and pain; and post-exertional relapsing of symptoms. In some cases
symptoms remit with rest, and in other cases they do not. Recent
research has shown that viruses, an upregulated RNase L pathway, and
mitochondrial dysfunction lead to low cellular energy in the heart, which
results in diastolic dysfunction with reduced stroke volume and low
cardiac output, and that postural
stress and exercise exacerbates cardiac insufficiency in this disease. So
if a patient improves with exercise, that patient does not have M.E. and
may have some illness other than M.E. (for example, arthritis, depression,
osteoporosis, and a number of other medical conditions do improve with exercise).
In addition to the above
central characteristic, Ramsay described three main components of M.E.:
(1) Muscle weakness and a delayed or impaired recovery of muscle function
after exercise. This has been explained by lactic acid build up as well as cardiomyopathy
and microcirculatory impairment under
our research-updated interpretive hypothesis. (2) Circulatory impairment.
This could include both macrocirculatory problems such as low cardiac
output and microcirculatory problems such as coagulopathy, abnormal erythrocyte morphology,
and other factors affecting the circulatory system such as dysautonomia
and low plasma and/or erythrocyte volume, resulting in exercise and
orthostatic intolerance. (3) Cerebral involvement: encephalopathy,
encephalitis (see our reference to Dr. Bruce Duffy’s QEEG work below),
neurological, and neuropsychiatric impairment. While all three must be
present for a diagnosis of M.E., some patients' symptoms may be brain
predominant, others muscle predominant, etc.
The 2003 Canadian Consensus Panel
Case Definition for ME/CFS
requires more narrow selection criteria than the 1994 CDC "CFS" case
definition to make the diagnosis, including
post-exertional malaise and fatigue, sleep disturbance, and pain;
neurological, neurocognitive, dysautonomic, neuroendocrine, cardiac, and
immune manifestations. It might be useful for researchers to stop using
the CDC's 1994 selection criteria for doing studies and to use the newer,
2003 ME/CFS selection criteria, as well as to subset M.E./CFS
according to presentation of illness,
degree of illness, and research findings to
achieve more consistency in the research data.
While the word “fatigue” was
occasionally used both by Ramsay and in the Canadian definition,
“fatigue” is too broad and inaccurate a term. There are more specific ways
of describing the symptoms, such as dramatic loss of muscle power after
exercise, delayed recovery of muscle
function, orthostatic faintness, cardiac output problems, and other more specific terminology than
“fatigue.” In 1921, Muscio suggested that “fatigue” should be banned from
strict scientific discussion. The defining characteristics of M.E./CFS can be
easily outlined without reference to "fatigue." What all patients
must have, at least according to both of these definitional frameworks, is
an abnormal muscle metabolism -- a delayed or impaired recovery of muscle
function after exercise, which patients experience as paralytic muscle
weakness and pain, not "fatigue." Tissue hypoxia-ischemia with its
resulting elevated lactic acid can lead to muscle weakness and pain, and
tissue hypoxia-ischemia destroys the respiratory chain and affects the
mitochondria, which cannot function without adequate oxygen. According to
recent research, mitochondrial dysfunction leads to diastolic
dysfunction and low cardiac output - a heart that cannot meet the demands
of physical exertion. Dr. Paul Cheney has shown that mitochondrial
dysfunction results in poor filling properties in the heart (because it
takes more energy for the heart to relax and fill with blood than it does
for it to squeeze and pump blood), resulting in reduced cardiac output and
hence severe functional impairment in ME/CFS. Cardiac muscle pathologic
changes have been documented in the research by Dr. A. Martin Lerner, and
recent research by Dr. Cheney has also documented cardiac muscle
pathologies. A disease this severe should be given a more serious
name than "fatigue."
[Back to
Top]
Symptoms
The symptoms of the disease are
exacerbated by physical exertion, mental exertion, mental stress, or
orthostatic stress. In severe cases, even slight orthostatic stress
triggers relapses. Symptoms may range from mild, to severe, to
life-threatening (such as tachyarrythmias or siezures). The level of
activity that precipitates these symptoms may vary greatly in afflicted
individuals, and the symptoms that relapse may vary. They may include:
sore throat, flu, fever, chills, body aches, sweats, low body temperature,
lymphadenopathy, muscle weakness, muscle pain, hypoglycemia, weight
change, nausea, vomiting, vertigo, chest aches, chest pain, cardiac
arrhythmia, resting tachycardia (this has been explained as compensating
for low stroke volume to help increase cardiac output), orthostatic tachycardia, orthostatic
fainting or faintness, opthalmoplegia, eye pain, stroke-like episodes,
difficulty swallowing, paresthesias, peripheral neuropathic pain, polyneuropathy, extreme pallor, sleep disorder, myoclonus, hyperreflexia,
temporal lobe and other types of seizures, cognitive, memory and
concentration impairment, attention deficit, anxiety, confusion,
disorientation, light/sound sensitivity, blurred vision, wavy visual
field, and other visual and neurological disturbances. Allergic
hypersensitivity is also common in the disease. The above information is
taken from four sources: (1) Ramsay's observations, (2) the Canadian
Clinical Case Definition, (3) patient reports, and (4) reports from other
publications.
[Back to
Top]
Turning to those publications:
Case Definitions
2. Most of the current research
articles, especially in America, on findings that fit our above-described
M.E. framework were published on under the name “chronic fatigue
syndrome” (“CFS”). Unfortunately, because of the broadness of the CDC's
1994 case definition for "CFS," known as the "Fukuda criteria," "CFS" became something of an
umbrella term for a number of diverse diseases. Selection bias became a
problem, and everything from depression to viral cardiomyopathy was
published on under the name "CFS." Using the ME/CFS case definitions
instead of the U.S. government case definition and conducting research on
precise
subsets could help remedy this
problem. (See our Research-Based Subsets page.)
Currently, two incompatible
categories of “CFS” exist: (1) The CFS of the 1994 U.S. government case
definition, the Fukuda criteria, which fails to select patients using any
past or current research. It does not select for muscle weakness,
cardiocirculatory, orthostatic, or neuroendocrine immune disease; it does
not describe any published lab work; and it focuses on "fatigued persons,"
making post-exertional sickness or malaise optional. These
criteria were a government invention and are too broad to define any
disease. Dorland's Medical Dictionary states that to "diagnose" is to
engage in "the art of distinguishing one disease from another." The
too-broad Fukuda
criteria lump heterogeneous conditions and hence fail in defining a
disease. It is widely recognized that the CDC case definition selects a
heterogeneous patient population, as does the concept of “fatigue,” which was forced on patients and
researchers by Holmes et al. (1988 US government case definition) who were
new to the field. (2) The other version of "CFS" is the "CFS" of volumes
of articles on cardiac disease, circulatory disease, dysautonomia and
endocrine disorders, abnormal muscle metabolism, mitochondrial disease,
immune disease, viral and bacterial disease, orthostatic problems, cardiac
output problems, etc. Yet none of these
telling research findings are listed or required for diagnosis in the CDC's case definition. We will leave it to
the reader to judge whether this is government bureaucratic incompetence
or a deliberate attempt to cover up important research. But the newer research-updated
Canadian Clinical Case Definition
more accurately
describes the disease, and should be used for diagnosis and modified and
adopted by the government for research.
M.E. and CFS are not two different diseases (even if
they are two different case definitions). Disease entities are facts and phenomena, while names and case definitions
are mere human constructs. Some constructs are more accurate than others.
Some select a different population than others. The name "CFS" and the
1994 CDC Fukuda case definition were constructs that were simply
inaccurate -- they were too broad,
selected a heterogeneous population, and failed to be based on important
research findings. The solution to these confusions is to stop using
the CDC's case definition. Recent research findings on cardiac output
problems in ME/CFS make the U.S. government's case definition even more
obsolete. Canada, New Zealand, and Australia have begun to use the ME/CFS
definition, and in the U.S. a pediatric case definition is in the works
for ME/CFS.
As regards naming, there is
little research on "myelitis" (although we do not discourage such
research). There has been some research on "encephalitis" because systemic
herpes infections also infect the brain (in addition to infecting the
heart, as Lerner has described). QEEG tests done by Harvard neurologist
Frank Duffy, M.D., showed a very high amplitude alpha rhythm and
epilepsy-like discharges in the temporal lobes of patients with the
disease. The temporal lobes have a predilection for infection by
herpesviruses in herpes encephalopathy and encephalitis.
(For newer research on brain and
neurological impairment in ME/CFS, see our
Research-Based Subsets page.)
Scientific progress cannot be made when researchers
focus on a poorly defined symptom like "fatigue." The term
"chronic fatigue syndrome" focuses on a poorly
defined symptom that does not accurately characterize the symptomatology experienced
by patients, promotes misunderstanding, and contributes to the disparaging
manner in which patients are treated by physicians. The name has
negatively impacted the quality of medical care patients are able to
obtain.
Many researchers, patient groups, and
authors of government documents in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada,
and the U.S. have chosen to use the name ME/CFS as an interim compromise
and to link this encephalopathy/cardiomyopathy disease worldwide until a
more suitable name that eliminates the terms "chronic" and "fatigue" can
be found.
[Back to
Top]
M.E. Is Not "Medically
Unexplained"
3. Unlike somatization
disorder, M.E./CFS is not "medically unexplained." M.E./CFS is a disease which,
like lupus, has no single marker. While M.E./CFS is a multi-system disease
with many organ and bodily systems affected, producing a myriad of
symptoms, and while no single etiology has been found for M.E./CFS, many
aspects of the pathophysiology of the disease have, indeed, been medically
explained in volumes of research articles. Circulatory impairment, which the
CDC case definition fails to
mention, has been explained in terms of coagulopathy (Berg) and/or
abnormal erythrocyte morphology (Simpson), low plasma and/or erythrocyte
volume (Streeten), and low cardiac output (Cheney). Brain/neurological
impairment has been documented by numerous researchers. There are well-documented, scientifically sound explanations for why patients are
often bedridden and unable to maintain an upright posture. We ask
the reader to visit our Cardiac Insufficiency Hypothesis page, our home
page, our References page, and our Research-Based Subsets page to study
these scientifically sound medical explanations.
The most compelling research
to date that explains the severe physical dysfunctionality in ME/CFS is
the research on low cardiac output available on our cardiac page. Writer
Laura Hillenbrand, in her 2003 article in the New Yorker, stated: "I was sure that being moved would kill me." In 2005 and 2006,
research finally showed that in ME/CFS, cardiac output is sometimes too
low to meet the demands of movement, and any attempt to exert oneself
beyond one's own capacity for cardiac output - that is when demand exceeds
cardiac capacity - would indeed result in death. Studies on dogs have
shown that when the demands of the body exceed cardiac output by even 1%,
the organism dies. ME/CFS patients
reduce demand and reduce their exertion level to stay within the bounds of
their low cardiac output to stay alive.
[Back to
Top]
Etiology
4. M.E./CFS appears
to be a "different insult/same result" disease, and no single viral,
bacterial, or environmental etiology is likely to be found, although we
are open to any discovery to the contrary. However, as Ramsay states, "the
particular invading microbial agent is probably not the most important
factor . . . the key to the problem is likely to be found in the abnormal
. . . response of the patient to the organism." Identifying and treating infections early in the disease is important to
halt any aberrant immune responses. While the insults may be different,
there may be a common pathophysiology.
[Back to
Top]
Inappropriate Treatments
5. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
(CBT), Graded Exercise Therapy (GET), and antidepressants are not effective treatments
for M.E. In fact, these therapies generally make M.E. worse. For an
excellent criticism of the CBT/GET studies from the Canadian Clinical Case
Definition, see
cfids-cab.org/ccpc-1.html. For Dr. Cheney's theory on why
SSRI antidepressants make ME/CFS patients worse in some cases, order his
2006 lecture, "The Heart of the Matter.". (See
cardiac page.)
[Back to
Top]
Progressive Cases
6. M.E. can be progressive (going from bad to worse,
increasing in scope or severity), degenerative (change of tissue to a
lower or less functioning form, as in heart failure), chronic, relapsing
and remitting, acute (having a short or a severe course), or lead to
terminal complications ending in death. Many cases of M.E. are
progressive and degenerative (around 30% of cases), and some have led to
complications that were terminal (see
http://www.ncf-net.org/memorial.htm
at the National CFIDS Foundation Web site).
Drs. Arnold Peckerman and A. Martin Lerner argue that the disease is
progressive. Leonard Jason, Ph.D., recently published a morbidity and mortality
study showing premature deaths from heart failure and cancer. Deaths in
England due to heart failure and some due to severe dehydration have been
documented. In M.E., as in lupus,
patients do not die specifically of the disease, but of complications,
often prematurely in their 30's and 40's. Some groups, researchers, and
films claim that most deaths are from suicide. The IN MEMORIUM list we
refer to does not confirm that piece of propaganda.
In her recent paper
(Jan 01), "THE LATE EFFECTS OF ME," the well-known English ME specialist
Dr. Betty Dowsett wrote: ".....FINAL STAGE (1,2) After a variable
interval, a multi-system syndrome may develop, involving permanent damage
to skeletal or cardiac muscle and to other "end organs" such as the liver,
pancreas, endocrine glands and lymphoid tissues, signifying the further
development of a lengthy chronic, mainly neurological condition with
evidence of metabolic dysfunction in the brain stem. Yet, stabilization,
albeit at a low level, can still be achieved by appropriate management and
support. The death rate of 10% occurs almost entirely from end-organ
damage within this group (mainly from cardiac or pancreatic failure). It
has to be said that suicide in younger patients and in earlier stages of
the disability is related to the current climate of disbelief, rejection
of welfare support and loss of educational and employment prospects."
[Back to
Top]
References
(For
additional references, see our Research-Based Subsets page and
our Cardiac
Insuffiency Hypothesis page.)
Written by Maryann Spurgin, Ph.D.