6 ms·
A "syndrome" is a classification of related signs and symptoms without relating them to a single underlying cause, so yeah, that's what it means. As more is le
by bmm6o 12y ago
A "syndrome" is a classification of related signs and symptoms without relating them to a single underlying cause, so yeah, that's what it means. As more is learned about the causes, different disorders can be removed from the syndrome.
- ggchappell 12y agoTrue. But note that "can be" does not mean "will be". For example, AIDS is a syndrome (thus the "S") whose causes have been pretty well understood for some time. However, it is still defined as a syndrome.
- EGreg 12y agoNot according to people like Serge Lang
- ggchappell 12y agoYes & no. If one takes the position that we do not have enough evidence to come to a particular conclusion (as Lang did), then one takes that position with respect to the information available at a particular time. I don't know at what point Lang last stated such a position. Regardless, he's been dead for nearly 9 years. AIDS is one of the most studied diseases in all of history; we learn more about it every year. It is certainly possible to state that we know HIV causes AIDS, without disagreeing with with Lang.
- mtdewcmu 12y agoIt's maybe worth pointing out that syndrome is completely absent any value judgment (in keeping with the scientific tradition of modern medicine); it's literally just a combination of symptoms that occur together. From http://dictionary.reference.com/ http://dictionary.reference.com/: Greek syndromḗ concurrence, combination
- vidarh 12y agoAs far as I understand it, AIDS is a syndrome rather than a disease because while the cause of the immune system deficiency has a single cause, many of the symptoms are caused by secondary problems that arise because of the immune system deficiency, and so the symptoms do not have a single direct cause, even though they're all indirectly the result of HIV, and the immune deficiency itself is a direct result of HIV
- mtdewcmu 12y agoI think it would be more accurate to say that AIDS is a syndrome because it's defined as such. You can also speak of HIV disease[1]. HIV disease would be the disease associated with the human immunodeficiency virus. AIDS refers to a particular syndrome. They mostly overlap, but they describe slightly different concepts. My speculation is that the reason the distinction persists is mainly historical: AIDS was described and became well known before the HIV virus was discovered and was demonstrated as the causative agent. [1] http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/211316-overview http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/211316-overview
- ggchappell 12y ago> My speculation is that the reason the distinction persists is mainly historical .... I imagine another reason for the distinction is that AIDS is typically a late stage of HIV infection. That is, people who develop AIDS have usually been infected with HIV for some time.
- mtdewcmu 12y agoThat would have played a role. No doubt.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]