Search results

Alternatively I’ve heard CBT for ME, described as - GET with the added push from the psyche angle to adhere to physical increases. Both push for increase, even if they pull back first, the aim is to return to normal functioning. Having said that both therapies are devised in line with a...

So it seems the MERUK article has been updated. The answer to Jim Shannon was correct. No Yellow Card reporting for psych therapies

Yes it seems so. I can’t help thinking however, that patient input will not be given the same weight as GP responses. It’s back to the same old chestnut, that patient testimony is disbelieved. Same reason that charity surveys are disregarded

So frustrating I tried to add the following comment on Virology Blog, but it doesn’t seem to stick: (I tried splitting it up, also using other IDs eg FB Twitter, Discus, Google! Still no joy. Meh!) All these therapies, that attempt to use mind games to convince the chronically ill that they...

Absolutely - but it might be a wasted effort if it isn’t collated. My view is a proper collation system is required and SOON. Many GPs will look at the current yellow page set up and just say it doesn’t apply, and so not offficially report harm. Direct patient reports are probably taken less...

And this could then be used to nullify any "harms" reported via the system. I think you are right. CBT/GET harms can still not be reported via the Yellow Card system. As @Jonathan Edwards says:

Whatever way you look at it, the answers given to Jim Shannon and the Countess of Mar are contradictory. I have put screen shots in my blog post (http://sallyjustme.blogspot.com/2018/07/yellow-card-confusion.html) and also the question I asked on the site. It follows on from my Feb post about...

No - I understand it to be UK specific

Okay. I've asked a question on the site, and also dumped all my thoughts into a blog post http://sallyjustme.blogspot.com/2018/07/yellow-card-confusion.html

Blue cardy?

Okay I’ll ask now.

This is contradictory to the earlier reply to question asked by Jim Shannon. Which is it then? https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2018-03-13/132337/ Edit to add screen shot of earlier question

It is interesting, yet onlookers may think we have treatments, they’ll have heard all the media hype on exercise and have absorbed it as common sense. So in my view it’s still important to spell out the problems. Agree there are other things we can talk about to further our cause, but I still...

The PACE trial must be contested or it will continue to be used to inform NICE recommendations. Thus it is important that it becomes recognised as unreliable evidence. Edit to reword a bit

Post Activity Collapse Syndrome? LOL we could go on and on thinking up names. I don’t think it is even possible to create a name that all patient groups would tolerate. I still just say I have ME and use ME/CFS only occasionally.

This! Things are now hopefully moving away from the psychosocial approach, and it would be best if the whole “fatigue” premise could be scrapped at the same time as the psychosocial premise withers.

Thinking on my Systemic Metabolic Insufficiency name idea again, and @Sasha’s question on whether we know that yet. I think at the most basic level, yes we can say that there is a Metabolic Insufficiency of some sort. Think about what happens if we try to push on through. Even in the moment, my...

No probably not yet. It’s just how I feel right now. Meh

Systemic Metabolic Insufficiency

I agree, the naming is a difficult issue. Like others I found some descriptors didn't seem to fit me - at least not on first impressions. Let's face it I've never been a morning person, so when I was asked about "unrefreshing sleep" - which was true, but actually not any worse than prior to...