Search results

Who in the patient community had evr heard of "adaptive pacing therapy"?

Is it made clear what is meant by 33 had not returned to work at the time of study participation? Does this include, or not include, those who had returned to work but then discovered they were unable to continue and were taking further time off?

It is an appalling indictment that people are still having to learn for themselves that "pushing themselves" only causes harm, if suffering from this condition. It is not as as though people have not been highlighting the fact. Oh well, you can cure your effort syndrome if you really want to.

For anyone struggling to understand what Brian Inglis (editor of the Spectator and TV producer) was on about in his letter this part of a review of his book The Hidden Power: science, scepticism and psi (taken from Amazon) might assist. Or might not. In this fascinating and remarkably clear...

Is this not an example of "abnormal illness behaviour". It is just that it is the doctors who suffer it. Obviously there are difficulties faced by both sides. The problems faced by doctors in these circumstances clearly need to be examined without "circling the wagons".

Horton refers to Alice James. Wiki says of her In 1866 James traveled to New York to receive "therapeutic exercise". Plus ca change

It is interesting that apparently a Registrar Psychiatrist was able to diagnose hyperventilation due to anxiety in patients he had never examined when a team including infectious diseases consultants was unable to do so over a number of weeks. Here is a passage from Alexis Shelokov's NIH...

Well, if an expert in the field said it, it must be true. If the charge is to be made, let us have some specifics. Do journalists no longer believe in Who, What, Where, When, Why?

The follow up on the last snippet will be this These findings do not support the hypothesis that any specific metabolic abnormality underlies fatigue in this syndrome although abnormalities may be present in a minority of patients. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136%2Fjnnp.56.6.679 Skeletal muscle...

Apologies if this seems off topic, but, whilst we await further informative tweets, I came across fascinating background reading whilst researching that strange article by Alfred Friendly which told us something important but is not clear exactly what. McE hardly makes much of the Chestnut Lodge...

There is something odd about the publishing history of the three M and B papers. The third paper is clearly necessary in order to make any sort of evaluation of the first two. There seems to be little difference in their readiness for publication. However the first two papers were published on 3...

"...a biopsychosocial aetiological framework". But, which one? Or doesn't it matter?

If only the climate were conducive to growing bananas. We could set up a republic.

One might almost ask whether the errors were innocent or fraudulent, and, if innocent, whether or not they were negligent.

That letter from 1958 looks to be damning evidence. The first M and B paper indicated that one patient had been ill for up to a year. This letter says that following this "some nurses had to leave on medical grounds, a small number are still off sick and many have had long periods of sick...

The opportunity to ascertain whether ME could be caused by flu was, of course, wasted by Imboden, Canter and Cluff in their 1961 and 1966 papers on the Asian flu epidemic, which studied either 600 or 480 people , depending on which paper you believe. However the follow up period was far too...

I think the problem was that people referred to the recurring symptoms, after the original infection, as being "flu-like". They never intended to indicate that the original infection was flu, although it was sometimes interpreted as such. So much is based on miscommunication.

Yes. The difficulty arises when some people conclude that it is therefore unnecessary to counter the suggestion that the "post-viral" effects of epidemic ME were hysteria. The lesson of the RFH was that there was an unidentified and possibly unknown pathogen which, even by McEvedy's data, led...

Thanks for the correction. It would be interesting to know the daily rate of discharge of patients. Presumably by 6 weeks with no admissions, other than staff, the patient population would be down to the long term stays. I noticed something else about that article by Friendly. It is strange...

Haven't yo all forgotten something? BISCUITS!