look how the Reeves definition and the CDC can skewer results


Tom Kindlon posted this to co-cure today.

Small piece in British Medical Journal (BMJ) June 2009

[tk:These are the results of a CDC study that used the empiric criteria (Reeves, 2005) for CFS]

[if: how very frightening - take a disease, establish a new criteria that includes psychiatric illness and excludes elements of the disease itself, then call for psychiatric treatment]

Published 19 June 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b2496
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:b2496


High rates of psychiatric disturbances are reported in studies of chronic
fatigue syndrome (CFS). Researchers wonder if this pattern reflects referral
bias rather than true co-morbidity.

In a study in Psychosomatic Medicine (2009;71:557-65, doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e31819ea179),
57% of patients with CFS had at least one current psychiatric diagnosis, and 89% at least one
lifetime psychiatric diagnosis, compared with 45% and 79% in people with
subsyndromic CFS-like illness. Most patients with psychiatric co-morbidity
had not sought help during the previous six months.

The findings suggest there's an urgent need to address psychiatric disorders when caring for
patients with CFS.

Don't support the Reeves/empirical definition/criteria for CFS?
Sign the petition at: http://CFSdefinitionpetition.notlong.com