Lancet editorial: Chronic fatigue syndrome: going viral? (avail. online Sept 16)

Rrrr

Senior Member
Messages
1,562
Likes
703
oh my god. this is a horrible editorial! horrible. they say that cfs could be a virus, and give all this solid evidence of such, and then they say cfs could still be a psychological illness!

what is wrong with this picture? why is the UK so dedicated to calling cfs a mental illness!?
 

urbantravels

disjecta membra
Messages
1,333
Likes
523
Location
Los Angeles, CA
"There is a general consensus that CFS is a heterogeneous family of disorders, and it seems most likely that these disorders arise from a constellation of pathophysiological causes. "

The hell you say. "General consensus" my afflicted ass.
 

xrayspex

Senior Member
Messages
1,095
Likes
377
Location
u.s.a.
I don't like that either. Sigh, they found a way to have it both ways perhaps......cya very good job, ingenious.
 

Wayne

Senior Member
Messages
3,457
Likes
4,580
Location
Ashland, Oregon
Well, I just showed this article to my partner without mentioning my own thoughts on it. After she got done reading it, she just burst out laughing and exclaimed, "talk about an ostrich with its head in the sand"!

I mentioned how I thought it was just incredibly bizarre how they would mention in the first two paragraphs all the reports and data associating CFS with viral infections, and then in the final paragraph resort to their long-entrenched way of thinking; may still be psychological.

I also noticed how they started out the article by stating, "The controversy surrounding the possible causes of chronic fatigue syndrome". Of course they're referring to whether the cause is psychological or not. Hmmm, now who created this controversy to begin with?

I just find this article incredibly bizarre, especially coming from a purported prestigious medical journal. It's behavior such as this that sometimes makes me despair about the human race. This isn't the first time this has happened however. :Retro wink:

Best, Wayne
 
Messages
5,867
Likes
12,615
Location
South Australia
The Lancet said:
The controversy surrounding the possible causes of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) resurfaced this month, after results published in the Archives of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine showed that children with the disease had higher levels of oxidative stress and white blood cell apoptosis than controls—findings suggesting that the children with CFS are fighting a viral infection.

The theory that CFS may be viral in origin first came to prominence in October, 2009, when a study in Science showed that 68 (67%) of 101 patients with CFS who were tested were infected with the murine leukaemia virus XMRV, compared with eight (37%) of 218 controls. A string of negative results followed, with several groups unable to detect any trace of XMRV in patients with CFS. But a study published recently in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reported a strong association between CFS and a murine virus very similar to XMRV. However, it is impossible to say at this stage whether these murine leukaemia viruses cause CFS, or whether they are bystander infections.

It is already established that many cases of CFS are preceded by an acute viral infection. Studies in cohorts of patients with infectious mononucleosis caused by Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) show that a small proportion do not recover from post-infection fatigue, and subsequently go on to develop CFS. But it seems unlikely that CFS is a consequence of EBV, because most people make a full recovery.

There is a general consensus that CFS is a heterogeneous family of disorders, and it seems most likely that these disorders arise from a constellation of pathophysiological causes. The results in the Archives of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine received great media attention. But they do not prove that CFS is a physical disease. CFS is still far from being a well-defined entity. When the totality of available evidence is considered, the uncertainty around our understanding of the physical–psychological interaction taking place in patients with CFS only strengthens the case for giving research into chronic fatigue the high priority it deserves.
"But it seems unlikely that CFS is a consequence of EBV, because most people make a full recovery."

So post-polio actually has nothing to do with ever having Polio? Or Guillain-barre doesn't exist because most people don't get sick from immunisations?
 

Esther12

Senior Member
Messages
13,774
Likes
28,350
At least they made a vague and meaningless request for more research.

You can tell it's something that they're really fired up about.

(Maybe that's unfair - maybe it is something they're really pushing for. To me though, it sounds like an after-thought to excuse their disinterest).
 

anciendaze

Senior Member
Messages
1,841
Likes
4,788
Translation

"The theory that CFS may be viral in origin first came to prominence in October, 2009" =
"nobody of any importance paid attention to anything in the 1980s or 1990s"*

"general consensus" = "people we deign to talk to"

"CFS is a heterogeneous family of disorders" = "Oxford definition is a handy grab bag without etiology"

"strengthens the case for giving research into chronic fatigue the high priority it deserves" =
"broaden the definition to chronic fatigue, and give the same people more money"

*"You're not talking about something that happened in the colonies, are you?"
 

VillageLife

Senior Member
Messages
674
Likes
36
Location
United Kingdom
It is estimated that approximately 450 million people worldwide have a mental health problem.
1 in 4 children are sexually abused.
The connection of child abuse & mental illness with CFS have got to be put to rest.
 

bakercape

Senior Member
Messages
210
Likes
1
Location
Cape Cod. Mass
Wow

reading that commentary was like watching a good movie where they botched the ending so bad you wind up hating it!
What did they ask Wessely" How do you think this should end"?