Search results

Yes, that is exactly my point. A walking test is objective, but is not an objective measure of ME/CFS. Mild patients aren't likely to have much if any difference in walking after recovering.

No actually, it's not just "a few very gullible people". There are a large number of patients who get stuck in this rabbit hole. I've been suckered into believing quack tests myself until I did some due diligence. Because it's a very major pillar of this illness. It affects a lot of patients...

The problem is there are no objective measures. We only have subjective ones (fatigue, etc). That's the reality.

Well there is this study, which found the exact opposite: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2023.1125208/full All the volumes for different parts of the brainstem (including SCP) were lower than healthy controls.

Well the study being discussed here is one example. We know a lot more about how the brain works, in terms of which parts of it control emotions, planning, HPA axis, autonomic nervous system, etc. and we also have fMRI which can show how these brain networks function in humans. Animal studies...

Check out the review I posted in another comment.

There are a number of studies that show that life stress is a precipitating factor, e.g.: https://journals.lww.com/bsam/abstract/1999/05000/critical_life_events,_infections,_and_symptoms.9.aspx https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395696000507 and that ME/CFS is...

Well, I guess there are always ways to critique studies. But let's try a thought experiment. Let's say someone has been told by their doctor that their connective tissue is falling apart because they have hEDS, or that they took Myhill's debunked mito test, so they think their mitochondria are...

Emotional circuits in the brain are fundamental to brain processing. See: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8675872/

We do now have methods such as fMRI. This review from 2016 explains it in detail, and I'm sure there are newer reviews as well: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.2147/JPR.S60433#d1e568 This study is not about ME/CFS, it's about back pain. However, there does seem to be a lot of overlap...

The things I mentioned: stress, fear, emotional attachment, etc. Patients can't directly control the pain, but they do have some control over these things which can influence the pain. This study looks into the effectiveness of a technique to do just that. Of course psychology has changed a lot...

It's not about ignoring pain. It's more about removing the emotional attachment to pain, distraction, stress reduction, etc. It's not directly under your control, but factors such as stress and emotions can upregulate the pain, and other mental factors can downregulate the pain. Having said...

Not sure I follow what you're saying. I don't see where they are replacing "chronic illness" with "recovery".

Except it is relevant for many patients (who say they recovered after addressing this fear), and we have studies that have looked into this. It doesn't mean that it is a factor for *all* patients, but it certainly does seem to be important for some. There definitely is evidence, including...

I think it depends on what you mean by "confirmed". There are many studies that have shown that stress is a precipitating factor, and that fear avoidance is correlated with improvement in CBT trials. I see that you yourself posted a comment saying that you had a very stressful life pre-illness...

There are many experiments that look at fear avoidance in ME/CFS, and there are many studies that have looked at stress as a trigger, and the stress response in patients.

I was ask the same: why do you attack them? I've talked to many of these researchers, and I get completely the opposite viewpoint to you. Again: these constant attacks are why researchers aren't interested in joining s4me. That isn't going to change until the atmosphere changes. I won't be...

Sorry, I don't have time right now to show specific examples. However, from memory, I remember many people saying that psychological stress doesn't affect biology, only the other way round. Jonathan Edwards does correct this misconception, but many posters seem to say otherwise. Also, many...

How do you define "compatible with bias"?

From what I understand, the indirectness was due to change in the illness criteria (the requirement to have PEM), nothing to do with the quality. Correct me if that is wrong.