The 12th Invest in ME Research Conference June, 2017, Part 2
MEMum presents the second article in a series of three about the recent 12th Invest In ME International Conference (IIMEC12) in London.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

answer to poster on ME/CFS

Discussion in 'Action Alerts and Advocacy' started by brenda, Mar 31, 2010.

  1. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,939
    Likes:
    1,468
    UK
    A poster on a board that I get on has just said that -

    the cognitive/reflection based treatments of CFS and ME are proving more radically effective than anything else - it has to do with certain stress response 'switches' in the brain that need to be, and can be, reset, but that is another topic! I don't mean it's not also a physical problem, but the brain controls our physicality toa great extent

    so I have the chance of demolising a few myths. Can anyone advise me and/or give some useful information I can use - thanks.
     
  2. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,680
    Likes:
    28,207
    If they mean, cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for CFS, results can look good on paper but Wiborg (2010) for example found in a review of three Dutch CBT studies that they weren't leading to increased activity levels - these remained low even though the intervention was supposed to improve activity levels. These were in studies where patients reported reduced fatigue as well as improvements in other questionnaire-based outcome measures. You have to wonder about the value of some of these questionnaires.
     
  3. biophile

    biophile Places I'd rather be.

    Messages:
    1,520
    Likes:
    16,577
    The burden of evidence

    Hi Brenda, the burden of evidence should be on this other person rather than you ("radically effective"?). So many wonderful claims, so little evidence. Research literature often claims cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most effective treatment for CFS. A closer look can be disappointing.

    Take the Cochrane 2008 systematic review on CBT for example (http://mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD001027/frame.html). 40% of those who underwent CBT reported a clinical response, compared to 26% of those who underwent "usual care" (ie did nothing). Even this 40% figure may be too optimistic, as only 1 of these 4 studies used to calculate this figure actually employed CDC-1994 criteria. Also, the long-term benefits were in doubt.

    TomK already mentioned the lack of objective improvements to accompany the reported subjective benefits (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20047707).

    Your "friend" mentions "stress response switches" and may point out CBT is not an adequate example of "cognitive/reflection based treatment" because it focuses more on fear-avoidance and deconditioning than psychological stress. The same Cochrane 2008 systematic review discussed above also claims CBT is superior to other psychotherapies. Although the superiority of CBT is debatable, you may wish to point out to your friend it is unlikely that whatever alternative to CBT they suggest is "radically effective"compared to CBT, which itself is not exactly "radically effective" unless we are talking about the conjectured 80%+ cure rate for ME/CFS after 3 days with the "Lightning Process" Hehe.
     
  4. V99

    V99

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    5
    UK
    Ask them where the biomedical evidence is to support the idea that, a stress response switch in the brain needs to be reset. If they name a paper, ask them where the study demonstrates this, etc. Pick it apart. Good luck
     
  5. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,446
    Likes:
    4,760
    The other side.
    but the statement is accurate - CBT/GET is radically effective when employed against people with ME/CFS - radically effective at destroyign them, at removing any progress they may have made over the preceeding years - radically effective at destroyign whats left of their abilities

    like so much of what comes out of the psyche lobby what they say is accurate - just misleading and a total lie - it's a word game to them

    oops -I seem to be being a tiny bit negative again - sorry
     
  6. V99

    V99

    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes:
    5
    UK
    Wonko

    It's not negative, it's a positive step to ensure that your health is not damaged by poorly informed medical practitioners.
     
  7. oerganix

    oerganix Senior Member

    Messages:
    611
    Likes:
    7
    1) http://www.forums.aboutmecfs.org/sh...to-provide-CBT-and-GET-to-ME-Patients.-Part-1

    2) See various posts or the original of:" Magical Medicine: how to make a disease disappear" by Prof. Malcomb Hooper which totally debunks all the fraud, smoke and mirrors and distortions of the CBT/GET gang.
     
  8. Dreambirdie

    Dreambirdie work in progress

    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes:
    4,052
    N. California
    Thanks oerganix, for that thread.

    Can someone also tell me where I can find a write-up on the various criteria used for CFS?
    I am in the process of getting this info together for all the health professionals I know, who are sending comments regarding the DSM-5 classification issue.
     
  9. leelaplay

    leelaplay member

    Messages:
    1,546
    Likes:
    148
    Hi db - the thread with the definitions should work for this. You know I love the Canadian Overview for it's simplicity to read, charts, point form, and then longer explanations.

    And thank you for helping people fight the DSM-5 classification issue!
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page