It's a two page nothing paper. Probably better to read the full thing than the bits I pulled out, as it's so shot. Full paper should be available here: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/innovation/groups/projects/cfs/publications/assets/2011/Knudsenlongtermsick.pdf August 23, 2012 The measures they used: When it comes to unemployment and filling in questionnaires related to embarrassment, the inability to comment upon cause and affect seems like an important failing, particualrly as the associations don't seem that strong. Good point Trudie. Your quackery, and dishonesty about the efficacy of your treatments for CFS will have made these problems more difficult for those diagnosed with CFS. I don't think this should be used as an excuse to spend more money on your treatments though. There is some evidence, isn't there Trudie? The £6 million PACE trial which you were a lead author on. Do you remember it? About a month ago, you released a paper which finally made available data showed your cognitive and behavioural treatments were not an effective intervention for returning patients to work. Some more data available here: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/suppl/2011/08/30/bjp.bp.110.082974.DC1/ds82974.pdf When you look at the data, it's pretty clear that this paper could have been just half a page: 1) raw data, 2) say that nothing terribly significant or interesting was found, 3) conflict of interests section should mention ties to insurance companies who have a financial incentive to claim that psychological factors keep patients out of work. Measures of disability in CFS are not very good, measures of things like 'Embarrassment avoidance' are not very good. Diagnosis of CFS is not very clear or objective. This paper is just a collection of questionnaire results from people in different situations, with different health problems, mashed together and analysed for associations. I can't believe how common these sorts of papers are in CFS. If these sorts of associations were found from objective data that we could be confident was free of confounding factors, then that would be of interest - this is just - ugh.