Here in the UK, the stranglehold of Professor of Psychiatry Simon Wessely and his colleagues have on our neurological illness continues to tighten, and the only treatments we can access from our National Health Service are psychological. It is worth noting that the Medical Research Council, who allot the taxpayer funding to medical research, have only ever granted funding into ME to psychiatrists (Dr Kerr's important work on genetics was refused funding and had to be funded by tiny charities): Wessely S (2009). Surgery for the treatment of psychiatric illness: the need to test untested theories. http://www.jameslindlibrary.org/trial_records/20th_Century/1920s/kopeloff/kopeloff-commentary.html "But there is also a second and more disturbing explanation for the alacrity and uncritical nature with which somatic explanations are endorsed on often the flimsiest of evidence. Psychiatry, its patients and its practitioners, continue to be stigmatised like no other branch of medicine. In 2008 I spoke at a meeting on chronic fatigue syndrome organised by the Royal Society of Medicine (RSM). There was a concentrated effort by some campaigners to have my invitation and that of my two psychiatric colleagues rescinded. Others wrote to the President of the RSM asking why psychiatrists could be permitted to attend a meeting at a society with the name “medicine” in its title, and seemed perplexed to learn that psychiatrists were actually permitted not just to attend, but to be members of the organisation. If one reads the angry responses to any article that mentions chronic fatigue syndrome and psychiatry in the same breath, it is clear that the drive to find a somatic biomarker for chronic fatigue syndrome is driven not so much by a dispassionate thirst for knowledge but more by an overwhelming desire to get rid of the psychiatrists. That it is psychiatry that to date has made the most progress in treating chronic fatigue syndrome is at best an irrelevance, and at worst just a further insult."