You have missed the point Duncan. These conditions are considered neuropsychiatry and they are dealt with by neurologists once the mental dysfunction has been correctly attributed to a structural or metabolic cause. So neuropsychiatry is the study of how such causes give rise to mental symptoms. As far as I know the is no such thing as a clinical neuropsychiatrist in the UK. There might be in the US but I doubt it. There are psychiatrists who deal with mental symptoms and neurologists to whom they pass on the neuropsychiatric problems that an MRI or blood test shows has an identifiable cause. There may be researchers who call themselves neuropsychiatrists because they deal with neuropsychiatric problems but I doubt it. I suspect they are either trained psychiatrists or trained neurologists who do neuropsychiatric research. Many happens to have trained in psychiatry but that does not matter. It is probably more pertinent to ME/CFS than training in neurology since ME/CFS has no hard neurological signs but has plenty of symptoms from abnormal higher function
No, I got your point. My point is that at the end of the day we will be dealing with an immune issue or a neuroimmune issue or an endocrine issue or a metobolic issue or a neurological issue or an infectious issue or an autoimmune issue..or a combination of these. Some may give rise to anxiety and depression and, yes, cognitive issues, and some psychiatrists/psychologists may try to claim them as falling within their purview -- but they will be able to help only marginally if at all. Their role will be relegated to employing metrics designed to gauge the extent of symptoms, and as it is now, those tools can be blunt and frequently misleading and sometimes can do more harm than good.
I want the appropriate experts who will figure out how to treat my disease, and in my opinion those who dole out antidepressants and other mood modulators like so much grass seed on a vast plain of soil likely just won't cut it. I have personally seen up close neuroborreliosis and brain cancer and a debilitating potassium channelapathy, and although each generated considerable cognitive problems, not once was a neuropsych consulted since the cause of each problem was beyond their expertise. Now, with a nod to your point, each of these may have generated symptoms that fall within someones definition of neuropsychiatry, but on a practical and real-world level, and with all due respect, I could not care less as it in no way helps. Definitions can by politicized with far too much ease. Definitions can prove to be a gateway to intrangency and dogma. Give me the appropriate experts any day.
So, whereas I admittedly do not know how they practice medicine in the UK, where I live we try to let the appropriate experts treat the disease that falls within their silo. I don't much care about political distinctions. I want experts who will appreciate the biology and not potentially fall back to voodoo dogma. I want my disease out of harm's way, and when I go seeking these individuals I am not going bar-hopping in a dark corner of the French Quarter, if you get MY point.
Accordingly, I remain puzzled by the choice of journal, despite its claim that it is part of the neuroscience cadre.