No More Psychological Studies. An editorial, by Mindy Kitei

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
Angela
there's nothing wrong with you or others pouring over these psychobabblers crap to find the few gems in the feaces if you so chose to do :)
You are behavign as a rational, sane, decent Human Being, but that does not work in the face of scumbags.

But again and to put this blunt and simple: it's like Jews, Gypsies, the disabled or whomever, trying to debate and analyze Nazi eugenicists's work/
they came up with the SAME psychobabble, the same bigotry, the same refusal to accept actual science
all they will see is their own bullcrap

If you gave the psychobabblers a dozen reports all validating XMRV published and applauded in all the journals, that the scientific community had accepted them, Nobel prizes won and ME even cured, they'd merely hunt for other vulnerable people to abuse, to justify, to make a living off of as sick parasites. They'd scurry off into the woodwork and hide unless rooted out and squashed like the bugs they are, then come back and bdevil some other poor souls. they have done it BEFORE!!
How many MS, TypeII disbettes and othe rpatients got slung in asylums etc because of these scum?
In WW2, they put folk with ME type illnesses in forced labour camps squads (worked to death etc) or "euthanized" them

If ME was proved phsyicla, cause and cure, I'd bet the more bigotted would probably kill themselves as their false "house of cards" collapsed around themselves, because a lot have seriously sick minds, that is why they are in psychiatry in the first place! It appeals ot them because they know at some level they are deranged OR because it lets them act out their sick fantasies with legal protection. It's the "Inquisition" of this era. Such people hunt out places they can run their power games from.

If you think that is ridiculous, then ask yourself WTF kind of sick SOB tortures kids into admitting "they don't have ME"? or accused families of Satan worshipping and raping their children on no damn evidence at all? Well those things actually happened. And the ratbags got away with it, because anyone ELSE who did such horrors would get jailed for one very bloody long time.

Shall we go onto Munchausen's Syndrome By Proxy? the two sickos who came up with that both lost their medical licences, go read up on them.
Know what MSBP really is? Witch hunt, BLood libel, same crap, made up delusions by men who hate women or different people.
So kids with ME can get grabbed and tortured (various torture regimes ot make them "confess" to not having ME, even electroconvulsive), poisoned (psych drugs when they are not mentally ill) and abused by the state, even sold for profit (oh yeah gotta LOVE that littl edirty secret in England, eh? see forced adoptions for cash making some folk money)
and to cap it all, it's a STATE SECRET!! because of the genuine concern of abusers, child legal proceedings are highly secret in the UK...which has let horrendous abuses go on, and is finally getting some damn attention.

Interesting statistic: 30% of psychiatrists have serious mental problems.

You have every right to ponder the psychobbalers investigations, as a free person, as an interested person, and because hell even raving loonies are right once in a while and you may find real value in some papers.

But this is *WAR* don't kid yourself otherwise
the psychobabblers have been making fortunes off the systematic abuse and "genocide by neglect" of us.
Now their insane moves on the general classifactions of metal illness prove those sucm want to control all of medicine to feather their own nests.
The lunatics are running the asylum.

At some point, you say "Enough is ENOUGH!" and kick scumbags right square in the ball-sack, because if no one notices, Ghandi's methods do not work, as no one cares about your cries enough to help.
The psychobabblers need complete utter united SCORN from us.
I'm not advocating they get "Banjoed" lol, no, but major verbal protest, refusal to co-operate in their studies, and legal proceeedings against them for crimes committed.
But you can't say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH without the requisite knowledge and rational reasons for doing so.

This community has been completely under siege by the psychs, government etc.

From Margaret Williams and Malcolm Hooper, to people like Gerwyn and myself (and the others), careful analysis of the FLAWS of psychogenic explanations of this illness has PROVIDED weapons, if you like, with which to fight this 'war of attrition' as Margaret Williams calls it. Do you not realise the work we've been doing IS the 'enough is enough'?

By your reasoning, we should stop that now- it's no use, we should just go back to arguing from ignorance in an angry way.

You comparing me to Gandhi is hilarious. I've gone up against some key adversaries of this community, and my work has really ruffled feathers, let alone the work of Margaret Williams, Malcolm Hooper etc, exactly the work YOU are arguing against.

Take note, Enid, picture of health, Silverblade, possibly 5150 people here - by your own logic, you are arguing against the analytical work of Margaret Williams and Malcolm Hooper!

As for 'refusal to co-operate' in flawed studies. YES. That's just happened. The community showed their teeth. This was done because of GERWYN, one of those people you think is looking over gems in the faeces (and who Mindy Kitei was implying as the 'passionate' people wasting times on analysis) ACTUALLY showed people, through ANALYSIS and KNOWLEDGE, WHY the study was dodgy.

Knowledge as a weapon people. Knowledge as a weapon.
 

5150

Senior Member
Messages
360
Likes
282
Hi 5150,

I'm sorry to have to ask this but: DO you get that people like me are NOT supporting psych therapy, but we are actually CRITIQUING the psychiatrists and their claims?

Otherwise- I can't see why you've used MY quote, and then said "oh please, can we hold on here?" It doesn't make sense.

Gerwyn, Tom Kindlon, myself, biophile, Suzy Chapman and others I haven't mentioned, have been working to show the psychiatrists' reasoning WRONG.

It's starting to feel somewhat Kafkaesque- nope scratch that, Through the Looking Glass- that people appear to be believing we've been supporting the psychs!!!!!

Certainly it shows how much harm Mindy Kitei's unwise comments can do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
best wishes to you in pursuit of your separate quest, apart from physical treatment.

You're the one saying how much good comes from keeping the psych approach in the equation? or am i crazy to think this?

why did i use your quote? because use of others' quotes does not signal agreement... especially in this case. i'm done with this circuitous psychobabble, so you debate on; i prefer to devote my precious energy to a more worthy end.
 

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
best wishes to you in pursuit of your separate quest, apart from physical treatment.

You're the one saying how much good comes from keeping the psych approach in the equation? or am i crazy to think this?
I certainly will not call you crazy. But you are definitely wrong and completely mistaken, yes. You couldn't be more wrong in fact.

I hope others watching realise that THIS level of misunderstanding has been caused by Mindy's unfortunate comments : (
 

jace

Off the fence
Messages
856
Likes
180
Location
England
Knowledge as a weapon people. Knowledge as a weapon.
Knowledge is power. Bless the web.

What we are trying to do, by analysing the flaws in "CFS" or "CFS-ME" as we have it here in the UK, is to be able to explain to neutral parties, who are open to argument, why they should not be persuaded by the Wesselys and McClures, not to mention Reeveses, of this world.

We need the rebuttals, to show why those guys I just mentioned are wrong, rationally, calmly and intelligently.

There is also a case for being so much of a pain in the butt that they do something just to shut us up.

It looks like Mindy's cut out the para that caused Angela's objections - good on her. We all get it wrong from time to time, and it takes a big heart to put right the mistakes it makes.

We need action on all fronts. Bull has to be countered wherever it is found. Without such analyses, the community could only say anecdotally that [insert psychological study here] sounds like bollocks, but they couldn't explain why. And that would cut no ice at all where it matters.

Win hearts and minds, people. We can, because we are right!
 

biophile

Places I'd rather be.
Messages
8,977
Likes
16,579
I doubt that biomedical research alone will magically cure the psychobabble

I don't doubt that proven organic pathology will weaken the psychobabble. But the psychologisation of CFS is deeply entrenched and this is a long term problem, change will be slow, and the psychobabble will adapt. I am concerned that people think the psychobabble will just magically disappear when organic pathological factors are confirmed. Biological abnormalities suggesting organic disease in the absence of overt psychological disturbances have already been found. And what if further biomedical research in the short term does not pass the traditional expectations of classical organic disease? Again, "biological abnormalities are more exposed to psychobabble if they are on the frontiers of science and more subtle than previously established disease processes".

I left the following comment on the article at Mindy's blog:

I support a priority for biomedical research using CCC, which should at least help to weaken the psychobabble. Some comments above have implied that the psychobabble can be ignored because it is irrelevant as we focus on a biomedical approach.

However, it cannot be ignored safely because in practice, psychobabbling researchers and authorities and "mindbody experts" don't interpret those biological abnormalities that Erik Johnson mentioned as confirmation for organic pathology in ME/CFS. To them these are either unproven, limited to a minority in the ocean of heterogeneity, or a "functional" reflection of cognitive behavioural factors in the delayed convalescence.

Psychobabble and biomedical research are not mutually exclusive either, the latter alone won't necessarily stop the former. Medicine already has a long history of psychobabble, even for organic diseases, still in the 21st century. Not to mention that the DSM-5 is heading towards expanding its influence into classic organic diseases too.

It has been reported that psychological factors can influence the subjective experience and coping style of people with organic disease processes, with possible feedback into the disease from "stress" and bad habits etc. This will be one of the biopsychosocialists' goalpost-adjusted responses to future organic pathology in ME/CFS, along with further speculations involving psycho-neuro-endocrine-immunology to justify previously assumed psycho>somatic mechanisms.

Wessely has already indicated that XMRV cannot explain the psychological research findings and that he wouldn't do anything about a virus even if found because he "is in the business of rehabilitation". Don't forget that CBT/GET is currently promoted under the guise of pragmatism, so is likely to remain pushed on us regardless of biomedical research findings and treatments, as a practical intervention to help reduce complaints and increase activity, because of its (dubious) evidence base. Analyses have exposed this "evidence base" as severely flawed.

Due credit to Wessely though for acknowledging that future generations "may laugh at his puny approach to CFS" (his words on the BMJ podcast, not mine). People are already laughing (and crying) over his approach. Others consider the cognitive behavioural approach to CFS as a form of abuse. Simply ignoring the psychobabble would be like a schoolyard victim "ignoring" the bully's punches because a stronger ally is on the horizon.

So I agree with jace, "we need action on all fronts" and "bull has to be countered wherever it is found". Without such analyses, the community could only say anecdotally that [insert psychological study here] sounds like bollocks, but they couldn't explain why.

Also, some of us are better qualified for different aspects of advocacy. I enjoy Angela Kennedy's analyses on the flaws in psychogenic explanations, I would not encourage her to stop.
 

biophile

Places I'd rather be.
Messages
8,977
Likes
16,579
The devil is real

pictureofhealth, you suggest that we should disengage from the psychobabble, that critiquing psychological abuse has not stopped it so therefore this strategy does not work? However, it seems to me that patients and advocates have tried everything already with little or no forward result compared to the desired effect, so using this same line of thought, basically everything done in the past (including the push for more biomedical research and letter writing etc) is a waste of time and effort as well.

However, if something does not seem to work, it is not necessarily a failure, because it is often difficult to tell how much progress has been made, or how worse things would be without the previous efforts. It could have been a hell of a lot worse without such efforts. The only thing I can think of that would be different than before is a dramatic increase in numbers for any strategy, for example, thousands of people marching on the NIH doorsteps. If we weren't ill and poor, that would have already happened on the CDC's doorsteps or elsewhere numerous times. Another factor is the obvious lack of unity in the patient advocate community as a whole, something which seems to be changing in recent times.

As it is now, flawed psychological research has an easy time getting published in journals and the related psychobabble memes have an easy ride through the public where assfacts abound. The relative lack of resistance to it (from the scientific community and medical authorities etc) has allowed it to proliferate. As I explained briefly in an earlier post on this thread and in the comment on Mindy Kitei's blog which I just posted above, ignoring the psychobabble won't make it go away and neither necessarily will biomedical research.

I understand the argument that precious energy should be focused on the most important areas. Pushing for biomedical research is an excellent strategy and I'm not discouraging people from pursuing that singularly. However, countering the psychobabble and flawed psychological research is still very important, perhaps even the other side of the same coin. I don't see how analyses of such are "fueling" the flames as suggested elsewhere by others.

Suppose the NIH agrees to an extra 10 million dollars or so worth of biomedical research a year. It seems unlikely that the US government would completely ignore the CDC and use the Canadian criteria exclusively. There is no guarantee that the results of such research are going to stop the psychobabble quickly or finally, it is a gamble to rely on that alone, especially if criteria issues are not resolved and the funding could be wasted, or even worse, strengthen notions of medically unexplained illness if the results are inconclusive. There is also a large overlap between critiquing psychobabble and critiquing research criteria.

You ask, "how many of us also actually pledged money to the WPI or ME Research UK to move a step closer to what we say we want". I have donated (chump change!) multiple times to the WPI, but if there was an organisation that specifically targeted psychobabble towards ME/CFS, I would donate to them as well.
 

biophile

Places I'd rather be.
Messages
8,977
Likes
16,579
Angela Kennedy said: You have been generating some really important analysis on the forums, a lot which I've certainly learned from.
Thanks! Ditto.

Angela Kennedy said:

But you can't say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH without the requisite knowledge and rational reasons for doing so.

This community has been completely under siege by the psychs, government etc.

[...]

Knowledge as a weapon people. Knowledge as a weapon.
Very good points.

5150 said: people who choose to work on their issues via introspection/psych.therapy are certainly to be supported
Of course, there is a difference between psychobabble vs solid psychological research and genuine concerns for one's mental health.
 

Recovery Soon

Senior Member
Messages
380
Likes
38
Having a Psychological undergraduate degree, and an intensive, daily, 12 year meditation practice, under the supervision of some of the most competent Buddhist teachers (though I am not Buddhist) in the West, I feel in a unique position to submit that the discussion of psychology in regards to CFS is a fatal diversion.

The mind/body connection is real, and exploring such avenues can alleviate a great deal of your suffering.

But the emphasis on such matters in CFS has only diverted funds, attention and dialogue away from finding a cure. It is a capital DEAD END. The more attention it gets the less attention real science gets. And until real science is focused in a serious way toward uncovering the underpinnings of this physiological disease this dialogue will perpetuate itself round and round as we get sicker and sicker.

Enough psychologizing. Whether intended or not, it is counterproductive to our goal.

I agree that engaging with the researchers studying such matters is largely a waste of time. As others have said, we will not change their minds. They are emotionally invested in finding an emotional cause for our illness. So its one EGO against another EGO. That's a recipe for a lot of wasted time.

Time is our most precious resource, and it's being wasted as I stroke these words and you read them.

Urgency is needed. Urgency to get real science on board with a sincere motivation to find real answers.

There's a diversion game going one. And we're getting our asses kicked.

And time's a wasting.
 

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
Having a Psychological undergraduate degree, and an intensive, daily, 12 year meditation practice, under the supervision of some of the most competent Buddhist teachers (though I am not Buddhist) in the West, I feel in a unique position to submit that the discussion of psychology in regards to CFS is a fatal diversion.

The mind/body connection is real, and exploring such avenues can alleviate a great deal of your suffering.

But the emphasis on such matters in CFS has only diverted funds, attention and dialogue away from finding a cure. It is a capital DEAD END. The more attention it gets the less attention real science gets. And until real science is focused in a serious way toward uncovering the underpinnings of this physiological disease this dialogue will perpetuate itself round and round as we get sicker and sicker.

Enough psychologizing. Whether intended or not, it is counterproductive to our goal.

I agree that engaging with the researchers studying such matters is largely a waste of time. As others have said, we will not change their minds. They are emotionally invested in finding an emotional cause for our illness. So its one EGO against another EGO. That's a recipe for a lot of wasted time.

Time is our most precious resource, and it's being wasted as I stroke these words and you read them.

Urgency is needed. Urgency to get real science on board with a sincere motivation to find real answers.

There's a diversion game going one. And we're getting our asses kicked.

And time's a wasting.
So we can just argue from ignorance then? Shout without reason or knowledge? Urgently?

Did you read Biophile's comments, post #28, above?
 

Recovery Soon

Senior Member
Messages
380
Likes
38
So we can just argue from ignorance then? Shout without reason or knowledge? Urgently?

Did you read Biophile's comments, post #28, above?
Argue from ignorance? Not exactly sure how that question relates to anything in my post.

Divert attention from time-wasting, such as the one we are locked in, and re-divert to the discussion of physiological research. That's the gist.
 

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
Argue from ignorance? Not exactly sure how that question relates to anything in my post.

Divert attention from time-wasting, such as the one we are locked in, and re-divert to the discussion of physiological research. That's the gist.
And though it sounds ostensibly good, when you look at the actual facts, it's an absurd proposition. Again, did you read biophile's post (#28)?
 

Recovery Soon

Senior Member
Messages
380
Likes
38
Yes, I did. And you still haven't convinced me. Though, according to your ostensibly good but in my opinion absurd logic, there is no way to quantify the ineffectiveness of your effort to sway me, so it might be working.

Though my words would clearly indicate that you are wasting your time, the possibility exists that you have convinced me at a level neither you nor I am aware of.

So you are free to embrace this possibility, and persist your time and efforts trying to change my mind, when there is little to no objective evidence that you are making any headway whatsoever.

But keep in mind, that the time spent comes at the expense of pushing for more biomedical research, whose benefits do not require so much counterintuitive faith and logic to quantify.
 

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
Yes, I did. And you still haven't convinced me. Though, according to your ostensibly good but in my opinion absurd logic, there is no way to quantify the ineffectiveness of your effort to sway me, so it might be working.

Though my words would clearly indicate that you are wasting your time, the possibility exists that you have convinced me at a level neither you nor I am aware of.

So you are free to embrace this possibility, and persist your time and efforts trying to change my mind, when there is little to no objective evidence that you are making any headway whatsoever.

But keep in mind, that the time spent comes at the expense of pushing for more biomedical research, whose benefits do not require so much counterintuitive faith and logic to quantify.
You mean you realise Biophile's comments demonstrate good reasons as to why your own proposition is absurd, and that in addition to this, there is no objective evidence to support your proposition. But you've gone down the 'retreat to committment' and 'tu-quoque' route (thank you William W. Bartley III) in order to try and win an argument you should never have weighed in on in the first place.

Edit: Actually, scrap that last comment - you have as much right to 'weigh in' on an argument as much as anyone on this forum, even when your argument is as obviously unsafe as yours was.

Ignorance rules, in your reasoning, and no demonstration of why this is a mistaken view on your part will make you change your mind. I get it now.
 

Recovery Soon

Senior Member
Messages
380
Likes
38
You mean you realise Biophile's comments demonstrate good reasons as to why your own proposition is absurd, and that in addition to this, there is no objective evidence to support your proposition. But you've gone down the 'retreat to committment' and 'tu-quoque' route (thank you William W. Bartley III) in order to try and win an argument you should never have weighed in on in the first place.

Edit: Actually, scrap that last comment - you have as much right to 'weigh in' on an argument as much as anyone on this forum, even when your argument is as obviously unsafe as yours was.

Ignorance rules, in your reasoning, and no demonstration of why this is a mistaken view on your part will make you change your mind. I get it now.
Yeah- exactly that.

Obviously you fail to grasp the obvious parallels between this conversation and your conversation with the psych lobby- You're wasting your time on both.

Although you did manage to force a few gratuitously arcane references (tu quoque- really?) which failed to rehabilitate a convoluted logic- but did foster the illusion of a cultured logician.

So, all in all not a total waste I guess.
 

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
Yeah- exactly that.

Obviously you fail to grasp the obvious parallels between this conversation and your conversation with the psych lobby- You're wasting your time on both.

Although you did manage to force a few gratuitously arcane references (tu quoque- really?) which failed to rehabilitate a convoluted logic- but did foster the illusion of a cultured logician.

So, all in all not a total waste I guess.
Ok. SO - now we've got that out of the way, let's get back to the topic.

You believe in 'mind-body' stuff, but are advocating that critical analysis of psych's claims should NOT be done- it's a waste of time. This means you are arguing that a state of ignorance is preferable. Your argument goes pretty much like this: "Lets get angry- but do it in ignorance! Those silly people showing the flaws in psychogenic explanations (which I, Recovery Soon, actually quite like!) must stop forthwith and are silly billies for continuing. Ignorance is best! Hurrah! I know this because those silly billies haven't achieved the complete and utter overthrow of the psychiatric paradigm, something already entrenched in society, all by themselves. Obviously their way is wrong. There's only one way, MY WAY! Ignorance is the only way forward!"

That pretty much sums up your argument.
 

Recovery Soon

Senior Member
Messages
380
Likes
38
That pretty much sums up your argument.
You're arguing with a straw man...and losing.

Did I advocate for getting angry about anything? I don't know if there's another Recovery Soon on the boards, but this one hasn't made that point in this thread- and you've said it twice now.

The point is that the Psych Lobby is too vested in their position to entertain your, my, or anyone else's ideas.

Therefore, the only way out of this mess as I see it, is through biomedical funding, research, and clinical trials.

If you think psychologizing with the psychologists will yield results- jump in the chair Dr. Freud. No skin off my nose.

But I don't personally think that is an effective strategy given the alternatives.

Clear? Or am I still wallowing in angry ignorance?
 

Angela Kennedy

Senior Member
Messages
1,026
Likes
146
Location
Essex, UK
You're arguing with a straw man...and losing.

Did I advocate for getting angry about anything? I don't know if there's another Recovery Soon on the boards, but this one hasn't made that point in this thread- and you've said it twice now.

The point is that the Psych Lobby is too vested in their position to entertain your, my, or anyone else's ideas.

Therefore, the only way out of this mess as I see it, is through biomedical funding, research, and clinical trials.

If you think psychologizing with the psychologists will yield results- jump in the chair Dr. Freud. No skin off my nose.

But I don't personally think that is an effective strategy given the alternatives.

Clear? Or am I still wallowing in angry ignorance?
Well yes! It is clear you are wallowing in ignorance, certainly. You are also fixating on a magical panacea of 'biomedical research' ALONE, and misrepresenting CRITICS of psychogenic explanations as 'psychologising with the psychologists', and actually equating those CRITCS with Freud (this may still be part of your wallowing in ignorance, not necessarily a deliberate misrepresentation). And you think it is futile to show other people the folly of psychogenic claims- because psychiatrists won't entertain them!! As if psychiatrists are the only people in this world...


By your logic, ALL OTHER advocacy initatives are unsuccessful, and must stop immediately, or be subject to scorn. Angry? Yes, you are right, you're not really advocating that. You're just advocating ignorance, and putting all the community's eggs in one basket (biomedical research).

By the way, more or less accurately summarising your position isn't actually a straw man.
 

Recovery Soon

Senior Member
Messages
380
Likes
38
more or less accurately summarising your position isn't actually a straw man.
By your own admission you mischaracterized my position by saying I was angry...duh, remember? And comparing you to Freud was not literal- that was sarcasm- something I thought Brits took to.

My point, echoing Mindy's point, is that Psychological studies are JUNK- therefore spending great time and energy debunking them is not necessarily time well spent- given the alternatives. You called that "A call to ignorance."

The point here is priorities. It's also about giving something more credit and attention than it deserves. Can you debunk Psychobabble studies? Sure. Should you? Depends...if you want to make a real impact then funding for science is probably your best bet. Can you do both at the same time? Maybe.

However, given the lack of energy in the community it would seem that our biggest priority, and hence the target of our collective effort, should be in the area of most impact.

Want to guess where that might be? Come on, go ahead.

Your spirited opposition to this very salient point is...I won't say ignorant- cause you've clearly trademarked the phrase- but shall we say, misguided.

Her point, and my point, is that Money and Action speak louder than a spotlight and piecemeal deconstruction of every Crappy Psychological study.

And no- that doesn't mean mindless anger hurled into the ethers. It means a unified, targeted call to action from our representatives to demand FUNDING.

If you want to pick apart each wacko psych study as a hobby- have at it.

But what we really need are priorities and action- not divisiveness and pockets of activity.

I know...ignorant, deulded, fill in the blank, yada yada yada.

(BTW- At least you've suspended the self-indulgent arcane reference tack. If nothing else, I'll consider that progress.)
 

5150

Senior Member
Messages
360
Likes
282
Having a Psychological undergraduate degree, and an intensive, daily, 12 year meditation practice, under the supervision of some of the most competent Buddhist teachers (though I am not Buddhist) in the West, I feel in a unique position to submit that the discussion of psychology in regards to CFS is a fatal diversion.

The mind/body connection is real, and exploring such avenues can alleviate a great deal of your suffering.

But the emphasis on such matters in CFS has only diverted funds, attention and dialogue away from finding a cure. It is a capital DEAD END. The more attention it gets the less attention real science gets. And until real science is focused in a serious way toward uncovering the underpinnings of this physiological disease this dialogue will perpetuate itself round and round as we get sicker and sicker.

Enough psychologizing. Whether intended or not, it is counterproductive to our goal.

I agree that engaging with the researchers studying such matters is largely a waste of time. As others have said, we will not change their minds. They are emotionally invested in finding an emotional cause for our illness. So its one EGO against another EGO. That's a recipe for a lot of wasted time.

Time is our most precious resource, and it's being wasted as I stroke these words and you read them.

Urgency is needed. Urgency to get real science on board with a sincere motivation to find real answers.

There's a diversion game going one. And we're getting our asses kicked.

And time's a wasting.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I wish I were as eloquent as RecoverySoon is in the above post. The sentiments expressed are precisely part of what I wanted to say, but guess I came up short. "No more wasting time on anything not immediately focused on physical treatment". My hour of desperation has already arrived, and too soon it arrives for everyone. In a progressive disease, things only get worse. The end game isn't pretty. My goal is to help others avoid getting to the tough end game, by encouraging effort into "physical causation and treatment". That's where the real answer lies.
SUPPORT WPI