mchpow

Maybe.

It's just that if CFS doesn't point to something real, then that non-real, non-specific thing, having an origin doesn't really make sense.

But if it is actually real (and specific), as indicated by another commenter, the origin seems fine. Still seems like there's mixed views in medical community though.

I was always under the impression that CFS was a non-specfic set of symptoms; a kind of catch-all categorical bucket for an unknown condition.

If that's true, then that post-viral infection origin seems misleading.