AbstractThe Rome III criteria for functional dyspepsia (FD), published in 2006, immediately generated controversy but have arguably helped to jump start the field in terms of mechanistic and therapeutic research. One controversy has surrounded the veracity of FD symptom subgroups and their overlap. In clinical practice the overlap of postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) is striking. In this issue, results from Belgium suggest overlap can be reduced by reclassifying those who have postprandial pain or nausea as PDS, and meal‐related symptoms predominate in FD. This is consistent with other objective experimental observations. The realization most FD occurs postmeal ingestion is driving a new conceptualization of the syndrome. For example, the observation there is an excess of duodenal eosinophils in PDS has been confirmed, with recent observations implicating increased duodenal permeability and immune activation. The link between PDS and anxiety, not identified in EPS, provides yet further evidence for distinct pathophysiological entities. While symptom‐based criteria likely need refinement, the recognition of PDS and EPS has promoted exciting progress.