Julie Rehmeyer's 'Through the Shadowlands'
Writer Never Give Up talks about Julie Rehmeyer's new book "Through the Shadowlands: A Science Writer's Odyssey into an Illness Science Doesn't Understand" and shares an interview with Julie ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

(Possibly junk) CDC CFS website: "fatigue that is not improved by bed rest"

Discussion in 'Action Alerts and Advocacy' started by Dolphin, Nov 1, 2011.

  1. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Many people may feel this is junk. And maybe it is. Anyway, here it is for what it is worth:

    This appears to have been added to the front page of the CFS section http://cdc.gov/cfs/ :
    The bit I'm highlighting is:
    This comes from the Fukuda criteria:
    Anyway, the only point I'm making is that substantially has been dropped.

    I will explain briefly why this can have at least minor significance.
    One of the big debates in the ME/CFS world is the rest-activity balance. One of the big theories is that we rest too much - that is why many of us are supposed to be so ill - we rest too much, stay in bed a lot of the time, we "boom and bust" and gradually become more and more deconditioned.
    On the surface, the Fukuda statement was designed that it wasn't the sort of fatigue that if people had a couple of days of bed rest, they would be back to normal.
    However, I think people involved in drawing up the wording, such as Sharpe, Hickie, maybe Straus may deliberately have chosen/suggested this type of wording to bash people who saying resting can be useful in the condition.

    Often one sees papers and other pieces which drop the "substantially". The problem with this becomes apparent because sometimes healthcare staff interpret this as "rest by definition doesn't help in this condition"!!!
    So that is a very dangerous message. Anyway, I can usually cope with "substantially" being dropped now and again with the knowledge that I can always refer to the Fukuda definition and say it's the proper definition. However, when the CDC starting dropping the "substantially", it is more worrying.

    I couldn't find the CDC website thread to add this. But if people are writing in, it'd be good if people add to their points that they'd like "substantially" added here. It wouldn't change the lay-out at all.

    ETA: The 2003 upgrade of the Fukuda criteria talk about the phrasing:

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page