1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
Can You Come for a Visit? My ME/CFS Says No
My daughter and son-in-law just had a baby last week. We are thrilled. But we won't be able to see the baby or hold her any time soon. We won't be able to take over little gifts or help out with housework or babysitting.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Wessley and White at work again

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by shrewsbury, Mar 20, 2011.

  1. taniaaust1

    taniaaust1 Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,873
    Likes:
    4,796
    Sth Australia
    Im not reading the article as Im not in the mood to get too pissed off... knowing what its about and who wrote it is bad enough. Anyway.. reading a few of fellow suffers comments based on it

    I cant believe they are still pushing that we are lazy kind of thing still... its a tactful way of making us sound as if we are lazy.

    DOH!.. if we were running about everywhere and physically active, well we wouldnt be diagnosed with CFS in the first place. It's as stupid as someone pointing out those with a headache had pain in their head
  2. taniaaust1

    taniaaust1 Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,873
    Likes:
    4,796
    Sth Australia
    I'll second your post. What disease are they looking at? Obviously one which has been created by the CDC which dont represent a huge group of us. Only the very athletic ones in my family get it, (my cousin who got it had schlourship at the Institute of Sport .. I myself used to be fit and active.. even did a 100Km Marathon while in remission)
  3. Enid

    Enid Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,309
    Likes:
    840
    UK
    If only GPs had the "tools" instead of being indoctrinated by the Psyches over decades to ignore what is perfectly obvious to some GPs of this illness - sure aint depression. Those b..... Psyches.
  4. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,613
    Likes:
    5,249
    What they were testing were simultaneous/near simultaneous factors

    I don't have time to read this thread at the moment unfortunately.

    But as I just read the full paper, I thought I'd post an observation:

    The risk factors were generally measured simultaneously or what they considered as good as simultaneously (one year before). People who had CFS a year before weren't excluded and they basically assumed things didn't change for the year.

    So when they talk about risk factors e.g.
    they actually mean at the same time. Figure 1 gives you an idea what I'm talking about.

    So, what a surprise, people with CFS are more physically inactive than average.

    One has to wonder whether other factors might also have been influenced by being ill e.g. if you're ill, you might feel more conscious of the support around you and/or people indeed may be less supportive than normal as you don't seem to be pulling your weight.

    The definition of CFS is very dubious but might need to leave that for a while.
  5. mellster

    mellster Marco

    Messages:
    799
    Likes:
    178
    San Francisco
    I do believe that it hits more physically active people as no matter how you spin it, exercise, albeit crucial for well-being overall, is a short-term stressor for the body. I also think physically active people have a harder time letting go (as evidenced by myself) and cause a faster spiraling onset. Longer term I think switching to low impact exercise and leading an overall calming lifestyle is the only way to go, maybe after a long time of stabilization one can attempt ramping up again. I think Wessley is 100% wrong on the target group.
  6. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes:
    5,179
    Ugh. That's ridiculous. Thanks for pointing it out.
  7. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,613
    Likes:
    5,249
    Reviewers' comments

    I like to read the pre-publication history of papers when I can (one can only do this with some journals) for various reasons e.g.

    (i) it helps me understand it a bit more (sometimes issues are spelt out a bit more than the paper which can sometimes be dense, at least to me)

    (ii) I like to see what individuals say - one can often get an idea of individual researchers' views from the correspondence; also I've noticed a few "fawning" reviews in my time

    (iii) I like to see how the whole process works.

    Etc.

    Anyway, this paper has a very interesting contrast in the reviews.

    This paper shows the variation in reviews:

    --------
    This is a medical doctor who is part of the Nijmegen team - a big CBT fan. He was one of the two authors of "XMRV and CFS the sad end of a story" in the Lancet recently, amongst other things:

    Reviewer 4 doesn't say a single thing - I've never seen this before.
    I just looked them up in PubMed - they are a psychiatrist or psychologist from Sri Lanka

  8. Mya Symons

    Mya Symons Mya Symons

    Messages:
    839
    Likes:
    167
    Wyoming
    What happened to "I haven't been involved in CFS research for years?" Didn't he just say that?

    Why is it that the cfs psych theory people always see the "egg coming before the chicken?". They can't see that perhaps it is the illnesses itself (this would be the chicken :Retro smile:) that causes the "poor economic status" and "the lack of adequate housing" and the "lack of exercise", etc.
  9. Desdinova

    Desdinova Senior Member

    Messages:
    274
    Likes:
    127
    USA
    Hum must be those 100 or less individuals who are out to get him. Probably stealing his identity and submitting all the papers and studies in an effort to ruin his good name.

    On another note I often wonder what would happen if he himself were to somehow develop or come down with real ME/CFS. Wonder where he would go for help. Certainly not to your mainstream outlets. Though it would be ironically funny to see him besieged by Doctors quoting and waving papers and studies with his name on them.
  10. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,954
    Likes:
    2,391
    WA, USA
  11. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,613
    Likes:
    5,249
    Most (all?) journals list their general policies with regard to reviewers. Some have what to me seem like strange policies: you can suggest reviewers (and some even let you say you don't want particular people to review a paper).

    This journal doesn't seem to have any specific policy along those lines:

  12. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,954
    Likes:
    2,391
    WA, USA
    ok, thanks for looking that up :)
  13. Enid

    Enid Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,309
    Likes:
    840
    UK
    I'd love to ask them what they know about ME - nothing it seems from all their pronouncements. If so wide off off the mark here can any work of theirs be trusted.
  14. Annikki

    Annikki

    Messages:
    30
    Likes:
    1
    I love how Wessely capitalizes on ideas like Hysteria, which was proven to be just PTSD by none other than Freud himself. Judith Herman MD wrote a book about trauma; political and domestic violence 20 years ago and this book gives us some of the history of psychology which gets missed. Freud, before he became famous, worked with Joseph Breuer to find a scientific explanation for hysteria.
    Understand, back in those days, science was trying to cleave itself from religion and hysteria was another puzzle for science to solve so that the power of the clergy would give way to "men of reason." What Breuer and Freud found (and Janet independently) unintentionally was that those so-called hysterics they worked with all had histories of serious abuse. Freud knew at the time what this meant- since a strange man talking at length with a woman was a novel event at the time, psychoanalysis became the context where the epidemic of sexual violence was first seeing the light of day.
    The problem is that the pressure for Freud to NOT stand by his findings, which he compiled in the text "Aetiology of Hysteria" led Freud to abandon his theory. From this point on he'd insist instead that children only went through a phase where they had sexual desire for their parents. That's a good way for Freud to cower away from the results of his own research and to make the detritus of sexual abuse get mistaken for something else.

    Yes, so Wessely's ideas are debunked by the founder of his own science- hysteria is PTSD. This also shows too that the yellow streak in his profession goes back to its roots.

    You can read some of that book here (just type 'hysteria" in the search box and it will find the section for you):

    http://books.google.com/books?id=3c...&resnum=1&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
  15. Graham

    Graham Senior Moment

    Messages:
    795
    Likes:
    1,934
    Sussex, UK
  16. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,261
    Likes:
    1,659
    Australia
  17. Graham

    Graham Senior Moment

    Messages:
    795
    Likes:
    1,934
    Sussex, UK
    Thanks, Snow Leopard. I plead guilty. I should have checked it. Sorry all.
  18. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,613
    Likes:
    5,249
    Not sure if you are saying the calculation was incorrect or not? It wasn't trying to use the 0.235% for the total but 0.235/1.607 to give the percentage of the CFS-like group one might expect to be left as CFS cases after exclusions.
  19. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,261
    Likes:
    1,659
    Australia
    I just thought it was an interesting observation as it seems to be ~0.4% that keeps cropping up.
  20. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,613
    Likes:
    5,249
    Ok, just wasn't clear. Yes, interesting.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page