• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Perfect is the Enemy of Good: Why Dr. Bateman's Decision on the CCC is Misguided


Naïveté about politics will never cease to amaze me. It’s common and it’s deadly. I have seen the we-can-do-better-than-the-CCC argument floating around the Internet. But I am afraid that option is not on the table here. Instead, we have exactly two options:
1. We will convince HHS to adopt the CCC ME disease definition.
2. We will get an ME disease definition by the IOM that revolves around “chronic fatigue” and that will make a mess of things for decades to come.
Are the CCC perfect? No, but perfect is not an option presented to us. The experts already said that the disease definition will continue to be updated over time, like it is with other illnesses. And clearly, the CCC are a much better starting point than “chronic fatigue,” which is what we’ll get from the IOM.
Does anybody really think that the IOM contract is an opportunity to create “evidence based [sic], broadly accepted clinical and research tools, [sic] that can accurately include or identify all subsets of the broad heterogeneous group that present under any case definition of CFS” using biomarkers, as Dr. Bateman suggests? Granted, that would be ideal. But given the history this patient group has with various government agencies, committees, etc., it must be abundantly clear to everybody who has been around this illness and its politics for a while that our best interest is not on the officials’ agenda. This is their opportunity to burry us, like they did with Gulf War Illness (GWI).
There have been two IOM contracts for GWI, the second one currently under way to create a disease definition. Suzanne Vernon of the CAA and Fred Friedberg of the IACFS/ME (both organization are represented on CFSAC) are on the IOM committee for GWI. Note that neither are experts on GWI. There is an unconfirmed rumor that Suzanne Vernon has a relative with GWI and it is conceivable that she has been and will be testifying on the committee as a caregiver. But given that there are 500,000 patients with GWI, the odds that she just happened to be picked as a caregiver "expert" are astronomical, especially since there are said to be plans for her to also be on the IOM committee to define "ME/CFS."
The first IOM contract addressed treatment for GWI. The committee determined that the best clinical practices for GWI are graded-exercise therapy (GET), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and antidepressants. The committee’s report of January 2013 also mentioned those same clinical practices for “Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.” The report furthermore introduced the name “chronic multi-system illness (CMI)” to be used instead of GWI. An incredible slap in the face of the men and women who have given up their health and often their families, homes, friends and ability to earn a livelihood, all for this country.
Does any of this sound familiar to anybody? If the government has no problem throwing veterans under the bus, why would they hesitate to do the same or worse to us, given the huge nuisance we are to them. Make no mistake: The IOM contract has the overwhelming potential of leaving us worse off than Fukuda ever did! Let’s not sacrifice “much better” for an illusory “perfect!”


Senior Member
Logan, Queensland, Australia
This is at least the second thread on this specific article, though the bolding may be new. Not that this is a problem: these issues need to be thrashed out and discussed, and then we need a plan of action. This is only the beginning of a response.


Senior Member
Yeah, where was Dr. Bateman all this time that the CDC has been using garbage like the Fukuda, the "Empirical" definition and other crap criteria?

Indeed, Perfect is the Enemy of Good!!! If we don't have the CCC, we'll have something worse, much worse!


Senior Member
Fibromyalgia Network​
Do you like Lyrica, Cymbalta or Savella? Have any of these meds cured you? Or has cognitive behavioral therapy been the answer for your fibromyalgia symptoms? According to the FibroCollaborative, a program funded by Pfizer and made up of 25 physicians, these would be your only options.1 This is what they promote as the roadmap to success, but actually, it is the roadmap to doom for all fibromyalgia patients.​
You may have initially viewed the FDA-approval of Lyrica as a milestone, but chances are you did not know what was brewing behind the scenes. Soon after the FDA-approval of the three drugs, new criteria for fibromyalgia appeared in print in early 2010.2,3,4 They don’t require a doctor to examine or talk to you; identifying your illness has been reduced to filling out a 2-page form. The criteria were disguised as an easier way for primary care providers to diagnose fibromyalgia, but more than likely, it expands the diagnosis to anyone who has muscle pain and trouble sleeping.

Listing of doctors is included in the article including Lucinda Bateman, M.D. – Salt Lake City, UT



Senior Member
NYC (& RI)
Good find, Eco.

Also noticed Charles Lapp on the list.

They are part of Pfizers Fibro collaborative. The article says that the collaborative pushes CBT and Lyrica, CYmbalta and Savella as the only treatments for Fibro. The article also implies that the collaborative came up with the new shady definition. I wonder if that implication is true. There are cites, but I don't have access to med journals.

Bateman's sister died of ME and ME-related cancer. It's sad that she started out in good faith and now she has, at least to some degree, become a tool of the anti-science lobby- CAA, CDC, IOM and apparently Pfizer.