A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article.
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Wikipedia's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.
A fact from Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 April 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Yes, the QPQ check tool to the right counts only 9. I don't really trust the QPQ tool that much because it barely counts 40% of my own nominations. But If the nominator feels that they have done less than 20 noms this can go forward or they can do the double. This case is on the honor system.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:48, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The tool gives a complete list of the nominations made by Femke since she started editing in 2014. It does not pick up nominations made before 2011, but that is not relevant here. TSventon (talk) 20:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewing some newly published sourcing, I've noticed that our management section is not quite comprehensive, and I think that's because much of it can't be shoe-horned into the current structure. For instance, fibromyalgia meds and gentle massage are often tried for pain management, which can't be fitted into our current structure. The section still looks a lot like the old treatment section. I'd like to move to three subheadings:
Pacing and energy management
Symptom relief (up to one paragraph per symptom, i.e. sleep, pain, orthostatic int, gastro issues, cognitive issues, and mental health effects)
Care for people with severe ME/CFS.
This roughly corresponds to how the CDC covers it (their management page is per symptom, a separate page for caring for severe cases). The German consensus statement has two sections (pacing and symptom relief). The Mayo clinic one has 2 core section (pacing and treat symptoms). The BMJ has ongoing multidisciplenary support as first-line treatment, and pacing and symptom management as adjuncts.
The current discussion of old-school CBT and GET would be merged as a paragraph in pacing. It's a bit duplicative at the moment.
An article on a neurological illness should not be written like this, it doesn't read encyclopedic. Comparison with cancer? What, seriously? Most references are ME/CFS advocacy sites. If it's as serious as cancer and AIDS, how come "Doctors may be unfamiliar with ME/CFS, as it is often not fully covered in medical school" and " No specific lab tests are approved for diagnosis; while physical abnormalities can be found, no single finding is considered sufficient for diagnosis"? Overall, the article overexaggerates the illness. Necatorina (talk) 06:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is based primarily on clinical guidelines from NICE, IqWiG, and the CDC, and on the Mayo clinic and the BMJ sources on the illness. I believe those are the best sources on the illness you can get.
The article doesn't say the illness is worse than cancer and AIDS it says the quality of life of people with the illness is worse than examined cancers and HIV/AIDS. The QoL of AIDS is quite good, given effective medication exists.
It may feel like the article describes a more serious illness than you may be familiar with because of how it's currently defined vs how it was defined 10 years ago. Now, to have even mild ME/CFS, you need a 50% reduction in functional capacity compared to pre-illness. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to underline, the comparison on QOL is sourced to a peer-reviewed study. Meanwhile, it’s not the case that "Most references are ME/CFS advocacy sites." I only see one such reference in almost 100 sources. Innisfree987 (talk) 07:55, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've replaced the research charity with the CDC. In terms of the how tag, on the mortality from ME, the answer is usually malnutritution as far as I'm aware, but I'm struggling to cite this:
The original source describes the two in the same sentence, but does not make the link. It states: "This can lead to loss of ability to work, the need for care including artificial nutrition and, in very severe cases, even death."
The NASEM long COVID report also doesn't say what people die from. It just says over 5,000 have died without clarifying if they also had ME/CFS or what they died from.
Non-MEDRS, but for context, renal failure from ME has also been noted as a cause of death.
My preference is to remove the tag without using any of these sources. But open to adding something if we can of course. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Severe chronic fatigue syndrome should be considered with "central idiopathic hypersomnia" possible comorbidity pathology[edit]
Severe chronic fatigue syndrome should be considered with "central idiopathic hypersomnia" possible comorbidity pathology (both are also "current scientific research pathology unknown and there are sleep disorders" diseases), both are prone to the existence of "drunk every night after sleep" this more significant characteristic, relatively rare characteristics. Moderate to mild chronic fatigue syndrome needs to consider a large number of "common diseases" and "rare diseases" in sleep disorders. Moonlight005 (talk) 04:29, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A "severe chronic fatigue syndrome"/hypersomnia pathological hypothesis[edit]
This is an English version of the pathological hypothesis analysis of "severe chronic fatigue syndrome"/idiopathic hypersomnia, which may be more intuitive for English users.
Url:
https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/690767363 or https://weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309405033349046731031
The title of the article is as follows:
"Pathology of IH may be hyperlocalized carbon dioxide excess"、"An important subtype of idiopathic hypersomnia (also including idiopathic hypersomnia with unknown pathologies, narcolepsy type 2, hypersomnia depression, etc.) is likely to be the mathematical model and analysis of the pathology of hypothalamus and other parts controlling ultra-small vascular lesions (such as blockage) of the awakening nerve nuclei leading to excessive carbon dioxide in a small range".
This does not seem to be discussed in high-quality review articles, so I do not think it deserves a mention here. It is unclear if these links are to scientific articles or more to a blog-type article. For medical content, sources need to meet the criteria as described in WP:MEDRS, which in summary means they should be recent and secondary (a review). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Overall a good read. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 19:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
We are in WP:QPQ backlog mode. Double reviews are required.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Double QPQ is not required. This nomination is good to go. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 18:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC)