• 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.

Expert opinion on the ‘Name Change Committee’ recommendations | 11 February 2015

Snow Leopard

Hibernating
Messages
5,902
Location
South Australia
Lenny Jason nails it with his comment:

Leonard Jason, a psychologist at DePaul University in Chicago, expects that patient advocacy groups will find fault with the new name, feeling that they were not adequately consulted. “As a community psychiatrist who values citizen participation in critical decisions, I think this was a strategic mistake,” he says.
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
Interesting debate. Seems like it would do more good than harm in the short term at least. What are other people's thoughts?

I had the 2 day in a row exercise testing done and was shown to be impacted quit a bit, so it would seem I fit the criteria?

GG
 

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
I welcome the report and the acknowledgement of the severity of the disease, and that it's not psychological, and that CBT/GET are useless and that, by definition, exertion makes it worse: and the call for more funding. I think all that's great.

I'd like to see consultation with patients before any new name is rolled out, and some actual engagement with patients - some to-and-fro about why certain terms, such as 'neuro-immune', might or might not be within scope. PR would be a great place to host such a thing.

I don't know if it's too late for that: I don't understand the process.
 

Iquitos

Senior Member
Messages
513
Location
Colorado
I welcome the report and the acknowledgement of the severity of the disease, and that it's not psychological, and that CBT/GET are useless and that, by definition, exertion makes it worse: and the call for more funding. I think all that's great.

I'd like to see consultation with patients before any new name is rolled out, and some actual engagement with patients - some to-and-fro about why certain terms, such as 'neuro-immune', might or might not be within scope. PR would be a great place to host such a thing.

I don't know if it's too late for that: I don't understand the process.
Well, it's being called a "draft." Maybe some of it can still be changed. I agree there is some good stuff in it but the name change is probably not a good one.

On the other hand, I'm seeing write-ups in the major mainstream media, more attention than this disease has had in decades. So maybe even the clumsy name is having a positive affect. Getting rid of the f-word is a step in the right direction.

And they do recommend a review of the criteria within 5 years.
 

Sasha

Fine, thank you
Messages
17,863
Location
UK
Well, it's being called a "draft." Maybe some of it can still be changed. I agree there is some good stuff in it but the name change is probably not a good one.

On the other hand, I'm seeing write-ups in the major mainstream media, more attention than this disease has had in decades. So maybe even the clumsy name is having a positive affect. Getting rid of the f-word is a step in the right direction.

And they do recommend a review of the criteria within 5 years.

I saw on the contents list that they had a dissemination strategy - I wonder if they did a really good job of lining up the media. If so, it's really paid off!

Not seeing much in the UK - presumably they didn't bother targeting places outside the US.