Search results

Thomas Szasz was a psychiatrist himself who wrote at the beginning excellent works about "his field". He himself, as I understood correctly, didn't view himself as an anti-psychiatrist. He "only" pointed out what psychiatry is - its history and its present. He, as others of his profession, like...

Fake science, real harm. I do want to avoid the real harm part. Therefore, one needs to understand their reasoning. If it leads to a circular reasoning on their side - perfect! To show that could be powerful I think. But I don't get that close. (Like in the DSM V definition of "psychological...

@strategist @Jonathan Edwards @adambeyoncelowe I am not getting something here...but I have the feeling it might be important. Is there some kind of circular reasoning in the CBT/GET defenders? I simply cannot process it :bawling: but I am close to it.

May I ask if I'm allowed to cite you where appropriate? I like "brainwashing". :D (By the way, that's what it exactly is.) But if I say it it's nonsense brabble by a crazy woman.

Absolutely right! What you say can be well used. Good argumentation in my view!

For completeness, do you have something at hand, a link? I think taking everything that we have one could build a good argument against agencies, doctors, judges etc. who want to put people with ME into the psychosomatic/depressed corner.

In the context of social law and criminal law, for instance, where psychiatric assessments - depending on the case - are almost normal. In the context of disability pensions, assessing the psychological aspects - either as a "plus" to physical diseases or alone to show that the underlying...

But it is very indicative: If a treatment doesn't help, the claimed underlying process is (most probably) not correct. I shall use this argument nonetheless.

Well, I totally agree. There is no science. But people in positions with certain power over people (like assessors) see that differently; and I'd say judges, too. And as a non-active researcher or non-scientist, those people give a damn about your statement. Even when speaking with family and...

"Psychosomatic" explains everything :D really, that's how they use it (at least in my experience). I cannot tell where psychosomatic starts and ends, but I am sure "they" can. They will find a reasonably sounding explanation for you getting pallid, e.g. fear in your subconscious of over-doing...

Thank you @adambeyoncelowe and @Invisible Woman! Malic acid - this has nothing got to do with "apple acid" (vinegar stuff)?

Rethinking your post...So could the way be something like the following: The cause of ME is still unknown. Biomedical findings strongly suggest there is a physical cause, but also psychological reasons were widely investigated. The PACE was viewed as "golden standard" amongst psychological...

It'a not off-topic in my view, but very helpful. And you say it absolutely correctly, only that in Germany we're still at the "it's all in your head" level, most of the times. I am collecting good arguments to counter that, either via biomedical research or via PACE or via whatever is reasonable.

That's not my experience. "They" don't have to prove anything, they just have to say it is so because they are the experts. It is you who have to bring along one proof after the other. So would it probably be a better direction - when it comes to doctors and agencies - to go via the PACE trial...

Thank you, @Jonathan Edwards. Actually, what you write goes a little in the direction of another question that pop up: I often critisize (German) guidelines (about CFS) as one-sided, because they nearly exclusively cite psychological papers and/or mention biomedical papers in a negative light...

Thank you so much @Snowdrop @mango @Alvin! That is so much, it is great. I am certain that will help a lot!

Perfect! :)

Thank you, @Snowdrop. All very helpful! Since I'm German, I might translate some things wrong. In Germany, it's seems to be common practice by authorities (health insurance, Work Agency, Pensions agency, other agencies, probably courts) to view ME as psychological, which regularly leads to...

A summary for friends, family, doctors, stangers...But also for authorities. The IOM report could be better for authorities. No? I would also like to demonstrate to authorities (or even sceptical scientists or friends...) that ME is physical and not psychological.

Thank you, @strategist. I thought about the IOM report but wasn't sure. Would you say it's uncritical? Thank you, too, @Snowdrop. I remembered this summary by @JamieS, but would it be ok for authorities/officials? What about https://www.cdc.gov/me-cfs/index.html and...