Firestormm
Senior Member
- Messages
- 5,055
- Location
- Cornwall England
Do you think that if they developed an effective treatment for our condition that 'talking therapies' and 'exercise-based' treatments would no longer be recommended?
What I mean to say is, that in the absence* of anything else, is this not a reason for CBT/GET ruling in the view of the medical profession? That something is 'better' than nothing?
Also, as our criteria are generally regarded as being 'too broad' people do report CBT/GET helping ergo - why pull them as 'treatments'?
(*My concern with this general thought has always been that effective treatments are available to help better manage our primary physical (and yes mental) symptoms.
It's just that they are not all made widely available all of the time or recognised by the relevant health authorities i.e. they don't get offered to everybody and prescribed (should they be deemed appropriate based on patient circumstance etc.))
What I mean to say is, that in the absence* of anything else, is this not a reason for CBT/GET ruling in the view of the medical profession? That something is 'better' than nothing?
Also, as our criteria are generally regarded as being 'too broad' people do report CBT/GET helping ergo - why pull them as 'treatments'?
(*My concern with this general thought has always been that effective treatments are available to help better manage our primary physical (and yes mental) symptoms.
It's just that they are not all made widely available all of the time or recognised by the relevant health authorities i.e. they don't get offered to everybody and prescribed (should they be deemed appropriate based on patient circumstance etc.))