Jamie Deckoff-Jones MD Report On Meds

[Daffodil]

what is the difference between dying of CFS and dying of a complication caused by CFS? its still dying because of CFS

 

[jeffrez]

what is the difference between dying of CFS and dying of a complication caused by CFS? its still dying because of CFS

Technically it isn't. And it might be wrong altogether to suggest that CFS in itself is fatal. People without CFS die of heart and organ failure, too, after all. So when dealing with someone who is nitpicking, I've found that it's usually better to try to be as precise as you can.

But this is all way off topic anyway, apparently fueled by an emotional reaction from the other thread. I think we should just drop it now and let the thread get back on topic.

 

[Daffodil]

it isnt wrong to suggest CFS is fatal. untreated, is it usually fatal.

 

[gu3vara]

No one actually dies from CFS. They might die of complications from CFS.

Following your argument, people don't die from AIDS as well, just from secondary infections, no big deal...

You can't assume people don't die from CFS, they might not all die of it of course. We don't have enough data to be sure, the emergence of this disease is still recent. I'm quite sure that at this rate I'll be dead before 50 because of it if left untreated. I often feel like my time has come so.... my heart is behaving like a goddamn freak and I'm only 30.

 

[jeffrez]

Following your argument, people don't die from AIDS as well, just from secondary infections, no big deal...

Exactly. I think in most cases they refer to it as dying of an AIDS-related condition.

You can't assume people don't die from CFS, they might not all die of it of course. We don't have enough data to be sure, the emergence of this disease is still recent. I'm quite sure that at this rate I'll be dead before 50 because of it if left untreated. I often feel like my time has come so.... my heart is behaving like a goddamn freak and I'm only 30.

I don't assume anything. Quite the contrary. That's why it's not really possible to say that people die from CFS.

 

[V99]

No one actually dies from CFS.

So why have coroners' put CFS and ME as the cause on death certificates?

I know you're emotionally upset over my remarks in the other thread...

No, not at all. You do seem to be diagnosing everyone with emotional and hysterical problems.

 

[jeffrez]

So why have coroners' put CFS and ME as the cause on death certificates?

You'd have to ask them. Because it really wouldn't be accurate.

No, not at all. You do seem to be diagnosing everyone with emotional and hysterical problems.

I haven't diagnosed anyone with anything.

 

[V99]

You'd have to ask them. Because it really wouldn't be accurate.

What would not be accurate?

I haven't diagnosed anyone with anything

Accusations then?

 

[jeffrez]

What would not be accurate?

Citing CFS as a cause of death has no meaning. The cause would need to be something that actually *caused* the death, like heart or organ failure. Saying CFS "caused" a death really gives no information about the manner in which the person died.

But I think we've already been over this ground. I asked if you could let it go so the thread could get back on track, but you seem unwilling to do that. Now you are accusing me of "diagnosing" people, and continuing to nitpick about my objections to that. I don't really think this is productive, so I'll just ask you one more time if we can just drop it before calling for a moderator intervention. Thanks, have a good night.


Accusations then?[/QUOTE]

 

[Daffodil]

i think coroners put cause of death: "so-and-so caused by CFS". just semantics. CFS caused the death. if it wasnt for CFS, the death would not have happened.

 

[V99]

How about:

Acute aneuric renal failure due to dehydration arising as a result of CFS.

 

[jeffrez]

How about:

How about what? It says the person died of kidney failure. "Arising as a result of CFS" is merely an opinion, not a cause of death.

 

[V99]

It is a cause of death, if a coroner say's it is. The coroners court, in the UK, is the highest court in the land. Otherwise who would decide?

 

[Martlet]

It is a cause of death, if a coroner say's it is. The coroners court, in the UK, is the highest court in the land. Otherwise who would decide?

The Supreme Court is actually the highest court in England and Wales since the law changed in 2005. Prior to that, the highest court was the House of Lords. Coroners Court has very limited powers. They can judge the cause of death and have jurisdiction over treasure trove.

 

[jeffrez]

It is a cause of death, if a coroner say's it is. The coroners court, in the UK, is the highest court in the land. Otherwise who would decide?

Again, the coroner said the cause of death was acute kidney failure.

 

[Daffodil]

um....RESULTING from CFS...thats not an "opinion"

 

[Martlet]

um....RESULTING from CFS...thats not an "opinion"

Absolutely right. Sadly, my brother-in-law died yesterday, technically from respiratory failure resulting from terminal cancer. It was the cancer that brought him to that stage. His breathing failed because of metastatic prostate cancer.

 

[Daffodil]

martlet.. i am very very sorry. bless you and your family.
sue
xoxo

 

[V99]

martlet. So sorry to hear that your brother-in-law passed away.

 

[V99]

The Supreme Court is actually the highest court in England and Wales since the law changed in 2005. Prior to that, the highest court was the House of Lords. Coroners Court has very limited powers. They can judge the cause of death and have jurisdiction over treasure trove.

I ment to say they are in discovering the cause of death. They decide if an investigation is needed, a death cannot be registered until the coroner has made a decision, and there is no right to object to a post-mortem.