Why do patients with ME have issues with "psychological factors"??

[percyval577]

If all psychiatrists and psychologists worked to their standards – assessing the patient as they found them, without applying politically-influenced theories – we'd never have had an issue.

I am actually not sure that the absence of political influence would be sufficient.

Ten years ago I think I was told that there was a paper investigating the success different psychological theories would make in reality. I was told that they have found that there wasn´t any signification, instead it turned out that some people are especially good in helping.

I am not sure if I remember right, that there has been a common guidance that psychologists must not be involved personally to any extend. Instead they would only apply the theories which they are teached in.
But this would be bold nonsense. In consequence you finally would neglect what you should feel as a human.

And patients (including children) have been harmed, and this might not have been only to any cost-issues but also to the issue that the psychologists are these ones who really know.


PS: I would not say that psychological theories (I know a bit Fritz Künkel) are nonsence, in fact they might be helpful if not ...

I have no problem with classical CBT if it suits the patient to have it. The CBT variant used in ME, particular with GET, is abominable. I have undergone classical CBT myself, and though it did not help much it wasn't a complete waste either.

I too asked for helped at a certain stage. If the psycholgist only could have stayed flexible it really would have been a small help. But I cancelled it after 12 hours for idiocy.

 

[alex3619]

But I cancelled it after 12 hours for idiocy.

I cancelled a doc appointment last year for basically the same reason.

 

[alex3619]

I am actually not sure that the absence of political influence would be sufficient.

DSM-5 is a book of best guesses. Its best thought of as mythology attempting to adapt to the Age of Reason. It might get there, say by DSM-X.

 

[percyval577]

@alex3619 If it only would be always possible to avoid appointments.
Neverhteless, non-psychological theories are not compromised in that manner, and one should expect to have less problems ...

I was not interested in any diagnostic guidelines, and I still have problems to read any psychatric books due to rudeness, I ever thought, well if it works ... but now it seems to me that I have misscalculated. I am slowed down and cannot do any maths, but DSM-X looks like a good explanation.

 

[Stretched]

The question is often; How come do patients with ME have issues with the fact that psychological factors could play a part in their illness? Now is that really true??

http://anilvanderzee.com/the-x-factors-of-me/

I am a long time PWC who followed the as yet futile cure research for ~30 years. I have evolved an observational premise that CFS is an intangible, like a feeling which is biochemical, i.e. in the brain. It’s causes may be close to the psychiatric field, but more tangibly, neurological mechanisms. Though no real need to rule out potential emotional components.

I think we all have this dynamic which is so far undiscovered in its piecemeal constituency. It’s like the reaction of a chameleon changing colors. It’s cause, though unknown as yet suggests a psychoactive place in the mind, triggered by stress of some sort, likely inputted through the eyes, whether triggers are physical or mental.

This is a neurological rabbit hole. It is difficult to explore because the science is so esoteric and complicated and neuroscientists have more pressing agendas. I wonder how many of them even take time to consider the nature of CFS relative to their specialized fields. Or, are they even aware of the problem, much of which has neurological correlations?

Many psychoactive drugs already yield dramatic palliative results for the various stages of CFS, e,g. dealing with cognitive issues, crashes and PEM. They, the various rxs can change the course of CFS, maybe not cure it, but make it tolerable, doable? @Hip has done a great job of sorting these out in multiple posts.

IMO, I would raise research banners around the various neurological camps. This calls for the classic paradigm shift in focus to research and funding to neuroscience. It seems reasonable that the time is right. Infectious disease stalwarts have for decades beat the same old drums looking for viruses, immune dysfunctions, mitochondrial disorders, and dietary experiments with little to no real effective results. Why not work backwards from palliative psychoactive drugs and explore how the mechanisms in the brain are affected by them? Just maybe CFS and PEM are neurological events triggered by ‘X’ in the brain chemistry?