There has been a lot of discussion of the pros and cons of the IOM report since it came out on 10 February.
The report has proved divisive: some patients have called for the report to be rejected, others want it modified, others welcome it with few reservations. I suspect we're on a continuum rather than in two camps.
Some anti-IOM-report patients have started petitions calling for the report's rejection and the adoption of ME and the CCC/ICC, but other patients are concerned that if the report is rejected, ME/CCC/ICC won't be adopted instead and the CFS name and the Fukuda criteria will remain.
Is it worth risking staying with CFS/Fukuda to have a chance of getting ME/CCC/ICC?
Have your say...
The report has proved divisive: some patients have called for the report to be rejected, others want it modified, others welcome it with few reservations. I suspect we're on a continuum rather than in two camps.
Some anti-IOM-report patients have started petitions calling for the report's rejection and the adoption of ME and the CCC/ICC, but other patients are concerned that if the report is rejected, ME/CCC/ICC won't be adopted instead and the CFS name and the Fukuda criteria will remain.
Is it worth risking staying with CFS/Fukuda to have a chance of getting ME/CCC/ICC?
Have your say...