• 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.

Psychological Medicine paper: behaviours that perpetuate ME: Chalder and Ross-Morris

Countrygirl

Senior Member
Messages
5,431
Location
UK
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-syndromediv/7C389251202684B201D7118CE7EE1343

These people just don't know when they are beaten. There must be a psychiatric label for that....just can't think of it right now.

Keep digging Rona and Trudie!

An attention and interpretation bias for illness-specific information in chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract
Studies have shown that specific cognitions and behaviours play a role in maintaining chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). However, little research has investigated illness-specific cognitive processing in CFS. This study investigated whether CFS participants had an attentional bias for CFS-related stimuli and a tendency to interpret ambiguous information in a somatic way. It also determined whether cognitive processing biases were associated with co-morbidity, attentional control or self-reported unhelpful cognitions and behaviours.

A total of 52 CFS and 51 healthy participants completed self-report measures of symptoms, disability, mood, cognitions and behaviours. Participants also completed three experimental tasks, two designed specifically to tap into CFS salient cognitions: (i) visual-probe task measuring attentional bias to illness (somatic symptoms and disability) v. neutral words; (ii) interpretive bias task measuring positive v. somatic interpretations of ambiguous information; and (iii) the Attention Network Test measuring general attentional control.

Compared with controls, CFS participants showed a significant attentional bias for fatigue-related words and were significantly more likely to interpret ambiguous information in a somatic way, controlling for depression and anxiety. CFS participants had significantly poorer attentional control than healthy individuals. Attention and interpretation biases were associated with fear/avoidance beliefs. Somatic interpretations were also associated with all-or-nothing behaviour and catastrophizing.

People with CFS have illness-specific biases which may play a part in maintaining symptoms by reinforcing unhelpful illness beliefs and behaviours. Enhancing adaptive processing, such as positive interpretation biases and more flexible attention allocation, may provide beneficial intervention targets.
 

A.B.

Senior Member
Messages
3,780
Studies have shown that specific cognitions and behaviours play a role in maintaining chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS).

All these studies have ever done was reporting a correlation between these things, and drawing extraordinary unsupported conclusions such as the belief to suffer from an illness being not the consequence of an illness but the cause! They have never ruled out that patients have an illness that makes them believe that they are ill.

Of course if you put it this way it's evident how stupid their reasoning is, but they hide it behind ambiguous technical language and weasel words.

I find it difficult to believe they are acting in good faith. I think they despise patients and don't mind exploiting us to advance their careers by publishing this junk.
 

helperofearth123

Senior Member
Messages
202
If they tested someone with diabetes about what they thought about when prompted with the word "sugar" that person would be more likely to think about their illness than a healthy person. Does that mean that their diabetes is caused by them thinking about it more often? Of course not.

Their conclusion is clearly false causation, that the thoughts about being ill are mystically causing symptoms, rather than they are thinking about being ill because they are ill. Talk about not being a double blind, they are totally blind to the truth!
 

Ysabelle-S

Highly Vexatious
Messages
524
Stuffed full of psychological projection - their own cognitions and behaviours maintain ME by making people worse with irresponsible CBT and GET, and hogging the little funding available. Moreover, the fear avoidance model is their own - their clear fear of biomedical science. They are the perfect manifestation of Einstein's theory of madness. They keep doing the same thing over and over, and it never works. This is their careers. This is what they've achieved in life.
 

worldbackwards

Senior Member
Messages
2,051
All these studies have ever done was reporting a correlation between these things, and drawing extraordinary unsupported conclusions such as the belief to suffer from an illness being not the consequence of an illness but the cause! They have never ruled out that patients have an illness that makes them believe that they are ill.

Of course if you put it this way it's evident how stupid their reasoning is, but they hide it behind ambiguous technical language and weasel words.

I find it difficult to believe they are acting in good faith. I think they despise patients and don't mind exploiting us to advance their careers by publishing this junk.
It's one for Occam's razor, I think: Have you a) found an entirely new paradigm of illness, not supported by hard science but rather by ambiguous correlation and "expert" opinion, or b) might you not know what it is?
 
Messages
87
I think PWME should all stop participating in these stupid trials. Of course an ill person is going to respond differently to words about that illness than someone not experiencing that illness.
I would have a different reaction to the word peanut than someone with a nut allergy.
It would be interesting to study the bias of researchers in this field to CFS related stimuli. Perhaps a trial should be suggested but I don't think we'd get any participants.
 

Jonathan Edwards

"Gibberish"
Messages
5,256
We would need some valid positive controls, maybe pairs of words beginning with C and B:

Cognitive Behavioural
Cardigan Bleu
Caught Bullshitting
Cold Bath
Custard and Bananas (to invoke repressed childhood desires)
...

The list could include checks for consistency and all the usual validation techniques. It would be important to do MRI scans of the limbic system and amygdala while the therapists are filling the form in though. That would get more funding.

The lack of common sense of these people is mind-blowing.
 

Invisible Woman

Senior Member
Messages
1,267
I think PWME should all stop participating in these stupid trials.

The problem is that a huge number of pwME have no real understanding of the politics involved. Not just newbies either.

But then this is exactly what SW et al wanted when they claimed that belonging to support groups will prolong/worsen the condition. Divide & conquer & keep 'em ignorant.
 

Jonathan Edwards

"Gibberish"
Messages
5,256

I am ashamed that a researcher at a London medical school should behave in this way treating patients like laboratory rats in effect. The thread with the request from Hughes is totally disingenuous. The purpose of the study was clearly not what was advertised. This is a serious breach of trust on the part of a healthcare professional and I think a formal complaint would be justified.

How can these people be so stupid that they do not realise that patients are sometimes intelligent human beings who can see through the 'researchers' ' irrational beliefs. And if your theory is about damaging false beliefs it might be a good idea to remove the beam from your own eye....

If I was the Dean of King's I think I would consider this a disciplinary matter.
 
Messages
10,157
I am ashamed that a researcher at a London medical school should behave in this way treating patients like laboratory rats in effect. The thread with the request from Hughes is totally disingenuous. The purpose of the study was clearly not what was advertised. This is a serious breach of trust on the part of a healthcare professional and I think a formal complaint would be justified.

That crossed my mind too when I read the post about the study by the researcher.
 

worldbackwards

Senior Member
Messages
2,051
I am ashamed that a researcher at a London medical school should behave in this way treating patients like laboratory rats in effect. The thread with the request from Hughes is totally disingenuous. The purpose of the study was clearly not what was advertised. This is a serious breach of trust on the part of a healthcare professional and I think a formal complaint would be justified.
Rather satisfying that the PR populous was generally found to be having none of it.
 

Gijs

Senior Member
Messages
690
As long as the cause for this disease isn't found, they can say whatever they want to say. When the real cause have been found -i hope it wil be soon- they say: O we didn't know that then.... They won't even give an excuse for their stupid behaviour and work. These people are very dangerous for the health of many patiënts. ''Aggravated assault'!