• 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, 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.

Spring CFSAC 2013 Meeting live streaming starting today - Weds 22 May

Mark

Senior Member
Messages
5,238
Location
Sofa, UK
were you able to hear me at all? (Gabby - on the phone)
Yes Gabby - you were very muffled for the first minute or so (their fault) but then they sorted out the sound a bit and I could hear you fine. I heard your excellent and clearly-expressed points about the priority recommendations. It was good that there was a consistent message from the patients speaking, with lots of people independently calling for the same recommendations to be prioritized.

I agree with Sing: the contrast between the agency speakers and the patient testimony seemed very stark. Maybe it's just my imagination, but I sensed a new mood of frustration and disillusionment in the testimony, as if the patient advocates have almost given up on CFSAC; many sounded weary of trying to get the same messages across yet again with little hope of being heard. Several mentioned the contrast between the FDA stakeholder meeting, where they felt listened to, and CFSAC where they did not. How things progress with the priority recommendations this afternoon might be a key turning point for CFSAC. If CFSAC proceeds to ignore patient input (which I understand is supposed to be its main purpose) and approves those priority recommendations in spite of what patients have just said, then I really do wonder about what might happen next...
 

akrasia

Senior Member
Messages
215
Mark, I noted the contrast as well, the feeling that no matter how articulate or eloquent patients are, there's a basic disconnect. The patients are full of passion, a sense of urgency, and the bureaucrats move in a kind of slow motion.

While I've spoken of my sense of the change that's occurring in at least the CDC and FDA, pace Wanda Jones, the pressure is coming from the private sector. It's a scandal that members of the FDA can claim that they were unaware of the severity of the symptoms. The sad thing is that I don't think they were being disingenuous.

For virtually all of my 26 years with the disease, I sensed indifference if not outright condescension and hostility to people with m.e., now it's more a sense of inertia, face saving. Their long range policy, if any, is "ass covering".

Gabi, although the very early part of your testimony was muffled, it was very well done. Thanks to everyone who has testified and will in the course of the next couple of days.
 

Nielk

Senior Member
Messages
6,970
I too have a feeling as if this committee is so jaded from hearing our testimonies year after year. I had a feeling as if they were doodling mindlessly on their paper while we were sweating and pleading our case (so far). I hope that I am wrong. Yet, I am not sure what else we could do?
 

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
I too have a feeling as if this committee is so jaded from hearing our testimonies year after year. I had a feeling as if they were doodling mindlessly on their paper while we were sweating and pleading our case (so far). I hope that I am wrong. Yet, I am not sure what else we could do?

My connection dropped out and I'm sorry that I missed your testimony - I hope to catch up with it if they post a video. Thanks for testifying on all our behalves!
 

Sing

Senior Member
Messages
1,782
Location
New England
Thank you, Jennie, for providing a link to your excellent commentary. Here is what struck me most:

"The second issue I must bring to your attention is the High Priority Recommendations List that you will be asked to approve this afternoon. Less than 30 minutes has been allocated for this discussion, and my information is that you will be voting on the original list as drafted in January 2012. I am sorry to say that this is patently ridiculous. If you allow this, you will be approving a list that is 18 months old, that includes none of your recommendations from 2012, and that includes two recommendations that have already been completed. Furthermore, the wording of several recommendations have been altered from the original versions, and you will be making this decision without hearing any of the public comment scheduled for tomorrow.

If you go along with this, you are telling the patient community that designating high priority recommendations is a formality not worthy of meaningful discussion or even the slightest effort to produce a current, up to date list. I ask you, Committee members, to move this discussion to Thursday afternoon so that you can devote the attention and consideration that this document deserves. If you do not, then I ask you to vote NO and not approve the list in its January 2012 form. We deserve more than formalities. Thank you."
 

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
Well, I missed everything this morning apart from the introductions, pretty much, due to my internet problems and now I seem to be live streaming the lunch break.

Was there any good news?
 

Nielk

Senior Member
Messages
6,970
Am I the only one who is surprised that this is what they chose as the guest speaker for the CFSAC meeting? With all due respect to Dr. Jaques who is doing his best to explain the process of medicare coverage, in what way is this benefiting the work of this committee?
 

Nielk

Senior Member
Messages
6,970
This has nothing to do with CFS. Even for the patients who do receive disability from Medicare, this information of the inner works of how Medicare comes to their decisions, has no effect on us.
 

Nielk

Senior Member
Messages
6,970
Had Dr. Jaques been knowledgeable about ME/CFS specifics, I would have seen some benefit. The committe could not even ask him about any specifics. Did they prepare for this meeting?
 

Sing

Senior Member
Messages
1,782
Location
New England
My feeling is that Dr. Jacques was clear, helpful and frank in his presentation on Medicare. I found him to be an example of a bureaucrat whom our physicians and advocates can get straight answers from, and pointers for how to proceed, in order to help us. Medicare is a huge payer and also, directly and indirectly, often a policy setter for other payers. --And since the money and the rules around the money do structure the field, we need to be clearer on what this structure is and how to influence it. I thought that Dr. Jacques was communicating as a team player, with the skills of a leader to see the overview. In those ways, he has helped this meeting move forward.
 

Nielk

Senior Member
Messages
6,970
Written Testimony
Gabby Klein



Hi, I’m Gabby Klein. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of you, today. I am a 58 year old mother, wife and grandmother. At age 48, I was gainfully employed, cared for my household and was an active member of my community. All this came to a halt on February 11, 2003 when I came down with stomach flu which went on for weeks. Eventually, the stomach issues went away but, new symptoms emerged. I had low grade fever, difficulty sleeping, headaches, muscle pain, noise and light sensitivities. After six months of feeling this way, I was forced to go on disability since I could not even stand at the bus stop waiting for my bus to take me to work.

It took almost two years to get a diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. At that point, I was mainly house bound because my condition was so severe. I was one of the lucky ones in that I found a specialist here in NY who understood my illness. He started by treating my very high titers of EBV, CMV and HHV6 with weekly injections of hepapressin,an anti-viral and with B12. Unfortunately, they did not do much for me. My doctor explained that had I come to him sooner, my chances of the treatment working would have been greatly increased.

The reason why it took so long to diagnose and why my condition had deteriorated so fast is due to the CDC toolkit for physicians. Based on the toolkit, my GP told me that I either suffer from depression or CFS and it really doesn’t matter which one because it is treated the same way: with antidepressants. In addition, he said, I should get out and exercise. I thought that by putting myself in the hands of knowledgeable medical practitioners, I would come to no harm. Yet, this was the start of my downfall. Not only did the antidepressants not work, I became more ill. It just wasted precious time. I tried to push myself physically which started the many crashes that were to become part of my life. The trivialization and misrepresentation of this disease caused me a lot of harm.

For this reason, I feel that the NIH’s recommendation of removing the toolkit from the CDC website is so critical. It is not just a matter of it having some erroneous features, it is a matter of the oath of “first do no harm” that all physicians take. This same toolkit has caused me harm and I am sure thousands of others patients who suffer every day.

I am fortunate that today I am able to deliver this oral testimony. Last year, I couldn’t. I was too ill to deliver an oral speech without stuttering and making mistakes. I was bedbound, in severe pain. I would like to speak about this severity because I feel that there needs to be a voice for the estimated 25% of most severe cases of ME/CFS in this country. They have been ignored for too long. They are not part of the results of the survey that Dr. Unger undertook of ME/CFS patients in several major clinical settings. Why do we leave them out as if they don’t exist? Even though the severely ill patients are bedbound, we have the tools today to reach them by phone or skype. I cannot think of any other lengthy chronic illness which renders their patients bedbound for 10, 18, 30 years!
This brings me to the recommendation for the NIH to fund ME/CFS research commensurate with the magnitude of the problem, and issue an RFA specifically for ME/CFS. ME/CFS is the most underfunded illness if one compares it to the size of the patient population and the severity of its effects on patients. To compare with MS and Lupus, ME/CFS was budgeted for 2012 with $6 million dollars (of which I believe less than 5 million was used) compared with $135 million for MS and $114 million for Lupus. If one calculates the funding per patient for each of these illnesses, it will show $270 per patient for MS, $76 per patient for Lupus and for ME/CFS, there is a mere $6 (or 5) per patient.

The third and last recommendation which I feel needs to be addressed is to hold a stakeholders’ workshop to reach a consensus on case definition. This is so vital because if we are not studying and doing research of patients with the correct criteria, it is all worthless and a waste of money, time and effort. This work should start with the Canadian Consensus Criteria of 2003. One of the reasons that the CCC improved on the CDC’s 1994 definition is the fact that it made the symptom of PEM – post exertional malaise a hallmark of the illness. It also takes into account that it’s not just an illness of fatigue; it’s a disease of neuroendocrineimmune dysfunction which causes fatigue just like cancer and heart failure does.

When I was 15 years old, I came down with Crohn’s disease. I suffered with the active form for 15 years. I was on a constant dose of steroids and azulfadine drugs. I had to be hospitalized over 20 times in that period. Yet, I finished high school, went to college, got married and gave birth to three children while having Crohn’s. Even though, I suffered a lot, I was a functional human being. With Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, my functionality, my dignity and my hope has been taken away from me.