• 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.

The Real Story About Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (on physical therapy/physiotherapy)

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
FEATURE
The Real Story About Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Research shows that the condition, once ridiculed as imaginary, is a true physiological disease. Here's what to look for, and how PTs are helping those who have it.
By Eric Ries | September 2017
http://www.apta.org/PTinMotion/2017/9/Feature/ChronicFatigue

A sympathetic article. Though I am still unsure whether physical therapy should be recommended at this stage of the knowledge about ME/CFS.
 

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
Apart from listening to patients, and letting them space out their activities, it doesn't give that much information that I recall on what physical therapists/physiotherapists should be recommending.

Exercising under the anaerobic threshold is mentioned at one stage.
 

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
One point of disagreement in the article:
Exactly how bright the future looks for people with CFS in terms of finding answers through research depends on who you talk to.

Louw is particularly encouraged by the body of work of Belgian researchers Mira Meeus and Jo Nijs, with whom he's collaborated, calling them "world-leading authorities in the field of neuroscience and people with chronic fatigue syndrome." Their work, he says, suggests that a "mid-range" of exercise is best, with no exercise or too much exercise both making the patient's condition worse. Their research, Louw says, "is very therapy-specific. I encourage PTs to look up their papers."

Davenport, however, argues that a "pain science approach" sometimes can underplay the value of patients "listening to their body" in favor of the message that "pain perception does not equal tissue damage." It's an area in which, he says, "pain science proponents and I have some robust debate."

He adds that while "some interesting papers have come out in recent years that seem to support the etiology of possible aerobic-system dysfunction" in people with CFS, a "causal link" to why CFS happens—and thus how it might best be addressed—remains elusive.
I'm not sure which specific research by Meeus and Nijs
suggests that a "mid-range" of exercise is best with no exercise or too much exercise both making the patient's condition worse.
 

Effi

Senior Member
Messages
1,496
Location
Europe
Louw is particularly encouraged by the body of work of Belgian researchers Mira Meeus and Jo Nijs, with whom he's collaborated, calling them "world-leading authorities in the field of neuroscience and people with chronic fatigue syndrome."
world-leading authorities in the field of neuroscience and people with chronic fatigue syndrome??? What a load of $$$. They are world-leading proponents of central sensitization (e.g. Canada has them to thank for it), but whenever there's cash to gain in biomed research, they'll happily jump over the fence for the duration of the trial, then jump right back over to talk about kinesiophobia and 'pain without tissue damage is merely perceived pain'. The impression they give me is that their main purpose is to keep their research team afloat. Not the greatest motivation for research, now is it?
 

Orla

Senior Member
Messages
708
Location
Ireland
This article came up on my facebook. I read the beginning of it and thought it was quite good but then I got to what felt like a sales-pitch and stopped. I am going to read the critique now to see what someone else thought.