Review Reports

Round  1

Reviewer 1 Report

It has been my privilege to review this excellent paper. It is a significant contribution to our knowledge of ME/CFS and its pathogenesis. We must now consider what could be causing these abnormalities. 

Author Response

I thank the reviewer for their comments. We are searching for the initiators of the responses.

Reviewer 2 Report

It was a pleasure to read this paper. It appears scientifically sound and well-written. My only criticzm would be that there are a few technical writing issues.

It is prudent to refer to the ME/CFS subjects as "cases" and not as patients.

Check the paper for small errors. i.e. et al should be et al.

Counting numbers less than 10 should be spelled out. Higher numbers can be in numerical format. 

Your degree symbol appears to be wrong.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. The degree for the second author has been corrected. The use of the patients instead of cases has been corrected. The use of "et al." has been corrected. The use of numbers below 10 have been converted to words and not numerical.