• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Professor Peter White reviews IOM report in Psychological Medicine

Denise

Senior Member
Messages
1,095

Gijs

Senior Member
Messages
690
Very 'funny' to see White writing about the importance of Heart rate variability (HRV) in CFS patiënts. He never tested this in the Pace trial, did he? Why put CFS patiënts on a GET program if you don't know if they have low HRV, isn't this unethical and dangerous?
 
Last edited:

Sidereal

Senior Member
Messages
4,856
But perhaps the most unhelpful aspect of this report is its over-emphasis on the physical, with an almost complete absence of psychological and social aspects of the illness. We have a whole chapter reviewing the potential roles of immune, endocrine and infectious causes, but little if any mention of the potential roles of life events, stress, emotions, beliefs, and behaviour. This report took $1 million to produce, and the authors have missed a golden opportunity to integrate the findings of both mind and body to move us away from the sterile, dualistic understanding that still dominates this illness.

:vomit:
 

Denise

Senior Member
Messages
1,095
None of those lead to the article, @Daisymay - have you got a better link?



S0033291715002366a_abstract.jpg
 

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,240
"But perhaps the most unhelpful aspect of this report is its overemphasis on the physical..."

Really?? Looking at physical and objective aspects in a disease is bad? How can one overemphasize the physical components of a disease?
 

adreno

PR activist
Messages
4,841
the authors have missed a golden opportunity to integrate the findings of both mind and body to move us away from the sterile, dualistic understanding that still dominates this illness.
Actually, it's the BPS school of thought that is dualistic, with its mind over matter emphasis. A monist theory would precisely emphasize the physical.
 

A.B.

Senior Member
Messages
3,780
But perhaps the most unhelpful aspect of this report is its over-emphasis on the physical, with an almost complete absence of psychological and social aspects of the illness. We have a whole chapter reviewing the potential roles of immune, endocrine and infectious causes, but little if any mention of the potential roles of life events, stress, emotions, beliefs, and behaviour.

These psychological factors are not discussed because the evidence for their causative role in disease is weak and not credible.

PS: the IoM report actually does say something about childhood trauma:
A study suggesting a role for childhood trauma in ME/CFS used the broad empirical definition of ME/CFS, which resulted in a biased sample with overrepresentation of individuals with depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Heim et al., 2009). The unusually high proportion of subjects with serious psychiatric problems likely explains the study finding of an association between ME/CFS and adverse childhood experiences. No other studies have suggested a higher rate of childhood trauma in those with confirmed ME/CFS as opposed to nonspecific chronic fatigue.
 
Last edited:

Kyla

ᴀɴɴɪᴇ ɢꜱᴀᴍᴩᴇʟ
Messages
721
Location
Canada
Can someone explain the meaning of "dualistic understanding" in the context of ME/CFS, as well as the meaning of a "monist understanding"?

Signed, Clueless in Toronto.
They are referring to Cartesian dualism. (theoretical separation of mind and body)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind)

Monism :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

Its a rich irony considering the fact that White et al consistently ignore all biological evidence and like to ascribe literally everything to behavioural/psych explanations
 

snowathlete

Senior Member
Messages
5,374
Location
UK
Can someone explain the meaning of "dualistic understanding" in the context of ME/CFS, as well as the meaning of a "monist understanding"?

Signed, Clueless in Toronto.

What it highlights in this context of MECFS is that due to the ever growing evidence of biological problems in MECFS White and others have been forced to abandon their long held claims that the disease is purely a psychological/social condition.

They know they can't win. But it's their income and status at stake so to hold on to that as much as possible and to slow true biological research as much as they can, they now argue the disease is a combination of biological AND psychological/social causes/perpetuation a. A dualist understanding.rhey don't want a monist understanding in favour of biological causes and perpetuation a as this would cut off their income and they'd go out of business.

Of course, for decades they didn't mind a monist view in their favour, yet despite their monopoly of research funding they have delivered nothing of value over all that time. A complete and utter failure, which is why the IOM report spoke little about his work, it added nothing of actual value.
 
Last edited:

snowathlete

Senior Member
Messages
5,374
Location
UK
I'm getting so fed up with their attempts to discredit the legitimacy of our disease. :mad::mad::mad::mad:

I wonder if the IOM authors will respond to his review?

It'll go on for another decade yet. But their influence is waning and they know it. I don't expect the IOM authors will come out with anything formal because his opinion isn't important enough to warrant it. Might be one or two brief comments from some of the individual authors though.
 

Antares in NYC

Senior Member
Messages
582
Location
USA
This report took $1 million to produce, and the authors have missed a golden opportunity to integrate the findings of both mind and body to move us away from the sterile, dualistic understanding that still dominates this illness.
That doesn't sound like science or medicine, but rather new-age BS. His rebuttal is a joke.
Replace ME/CFS with Multiple Sclerosis, chronic tuberculosis, or shingles, and let's see how it sounds.

"Dualistic understanding that still dominates this illness" only in his mind and the Oxford cabal. The rest of the medical research community is progressively seeing more and more physical evidence at the root of ME/CFS. This body/mind talk is simply voodoo medicine. Happy thoughts and wishful think don't cure this sh#t!

(OK, rant mode off)
 

sarah darwins

Senior Member
Messages
2,508
Location
Cornwall, UK
But perhaps the most unhelpful aspect of this report is its over-emphasis on the physical, with an almost complete absence of psychological and social aspects of the illness. We have a whole chapter reviewing the potential roles of immune, endocrine and infectious causes, but little if any mention of the potential roles of life events, stress, emotions, beliefs, and behaviour. This report took $1 million to produce, and the authors have missed a golden opportunity to integrate the findings of both mind and body to move us away from the sterile, dualistic understanding that still dominates this illness.

I mean, is he actually taking the piss now? In the UK psych 'research' (mm, more questionnaires) is the only sort that gets funded for "this illness". What's dualistic about that?

And $1 million? He helped blow 10 times that on the junk PACE trial.

Yep, taking the piss. Definitely.