Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

ME/CFS CDC prevalence number changed?

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Rrrr, May 15, 2011.

  1. Rrrr

    Rrrr Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,549
    Likes:
    662
    ME/CFS CDC prevalence number changed?

    does anyone know, is there a new cdc prevalence number out there now? i heard cdc just changed it from 1-4 million to, now, 4-7 million. could that be right?
     
  2. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,249
    Likes:
    33,562
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    Hi Rrrr, I don't know about that, but my calculations put the total world ME/CFS population at nearly thirty million - if these stats are correct (which is doubtful), then the world ME/CFS population is up to 163 million. That is equivalent to nearly eight times the population of Australia, or over half the population of the USA. Bye, Alex
     
  3. caledonia

    caledonia

    Messages:
    4,203
    Likes:
    3,211
    Cincinnati, OH, USA
    That's a new one on me. There would have to be some new research backing this up, but I haven't found it.
     
  4. taniaaust1

    taniaaust1

    Messages:
    11,870
    Likes:
    12,562
    Sth Australia
    Are you able to provide the source for this info? Online?? that it has just been changed
     
  5. Cort

    Cort Phoenix Rising Founder

    I think that would only happen if a new study came out.....I don't know that one has.
     
  6. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes:
    27,398
    The Georgia study (2007) using the so-called empiric criteria would allow them to use 4+ million.
     
  7. Desdinova

    Desdinova Senior Member

    Messages:
    276
    Likes:
    134
    USA
    Does anyone here even trust the CDC's Statistics and Information? As long as they continue to use a GIGO definition criteria I sure don't. The bulk of their information, opinions, beliefs, stats etc on ME/CFS are a sadistic insulting joke.
     
  8. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes:
    27,398
    Yes, exactly, as long as they use a "GIGO definition criteria" I sure don't either.

    P.S. there's a petition against the criteria, for what it's worth - see last link in my (long!) sig.
     
  9. Rrrr

    Rrrr Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,549
    Likes:
    662
    sorry if i started a false rumor. i thought i heard someone mention the new figure at cfsac, during a public testimony. but i guess not.
     
  10. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes:
    27,398
    The logical extension of the 2.54% prevalence figure the CDC reported from the Georgia study is a figure of at least 4 million. Many people would round it up to 7 million - that's what it would be if the prevalence was the same in older adults and children.
     
  11. justinreilly

    justinreilly Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes:
    1,214
    NYC (& RI)
    Peter White Nonsense Paper

    the CDC website
    http://www.cdc.gov/cfs/publications/surveillance_studies/index.html

    links to this paper by Peter White:
    http://www.pophealthmetrics.com/content/5/1/6
    White says the Reeves Criteria are too strict! And they are compared to the even worse Oxford criteria:
    My question is now where did they get the 4M prevalence figure from?
     
  12. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes:
    27,398
  13. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Hibernating

    Messages:
    4,566
    Likes:
    12,027
    South Australia
    This figure is great (in a bad way since it suggests lots of people are in a relapse-remitting mode) and everything, but more to the point, if it affects so many Americans, where is the research funding?
     
  14. Desdinova

    Desdinova Senior Member

    Messages:
    276
    Likes:
    134
    USA
    You have to remember in their minds you don't need funding for ME/CFS on a large scale. Not when it's nothing more then an amalgam of mental heath disorders and the physical deconditioning that has occurred as a result of them. They already know how to treat the disorder but it's up to the patients to cooperate, believe in and follow the GET and CBT programs. Any ME/CFS suffer not doing so is simply a Difficult patient and any ME/CFS suffer who does but gets worse while doing so is just the occasional odd anomaly. One that is quickly forgotten about and fades out of memory.
     
  15. August59

    August59 Daughters High School Graduation

    Messages:
    1,617
    Likes:
    624
    Upstate SC, USA
    With massive budget cuts looming on the horizon this could be just a tactic by the "pshyco" lobby to boost the numbers to help shore up funding. If it works we will probably see small validation studies for the PACE Trials. Haah!! A validation trial on something that is completely broke and only the CDC could validate such a farse!!
     
  16. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,542
    Likes:
    27,398
    Yes, there was talk of such studies in the 5 year external plan. The small external committee (which included Peter White) reviewing the CDC's CFS program had previously recommend such studies. :(
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page