The lecture is aimed at students who may want to move into the same sort of research and advocacy he has done as community psychologists. He is essentially using his work with ME/CFS as an example.
It provides something of a history and overview of the condition and the CDC/medical community's reaction to it.
There are some problems with background noise, I found the first 20 minutes or so pretty boring.
I think the problem is that he took a while to catch the attention of the students and was repeating himself/recapping too often. It's the presentation not the information, and once they become interested he becomes more interesting.
At 25 minutes he talks about a data mining experiment on a database of questionnaires of 1000 people with ME/CFS, to empirically determine core symptoms and subtypes.
31 minutes DIS and SCID an example of how using the wrong test leads to the wrong conclusion, and an example of how evidence can fail, for a time at least, to change practice.
44 minutes talks about research showing the way that the choice between the names CFS and ME had a big impact on perceptions of symptoms.
52 minutes Vercoulen et al and false illness belief.
1:10 2nd order change. not just providing emotional support but changing the situation.
The questions from 1:17 are interesting too.
It is interesting but more from an advocacy, history of the research point of view than a how do I get well/deal with this illness point of view.
