BPS attempts at psychologizing Long Covid

Fitness industry’s role in rehabilitating COVID-19 sufferers 'cannot be over-estimated'

https://www.healthclubmanagement.co...e-Steve-Ward-Dane-Vishnubala-Active-IQ/346202

While much about the virus is still unknown, medics are already reporting high incidences of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in post-COVID patients, as well as a wide range of issues with organ damage and reduced lung capacity and scarring.

Studies on previous pandemics – such as SARS in 2002 – also suggest that those suffering from the effects of the virus will need to rebuild their physical and mental resilience.
Click to expand...
"Operators should also anticipate patients presenting with mental health challenges as a result of the crisis.

"At Lanserhof, we have found patients have generally been emotionally and mentally discouraged. They complain of feeling drained and report cravings and a tendency to adopt bad habits. This suggests there is likely to be a spike in addictive behaviour and possible substance misuse issues."

According to Dr Dane Vishnubala, chief medical advisor at Active IQ, the fitness industry has the facilities and the staff to make a huge difference in returning COVID-19 survivors to full health.

"Fitness professionals have the consultation, empathetic, coaching and programming skills which could be adapted to provide a supportive workforce to aid in post COVID-19 rehabilitation efforts," he told HCM.
Click to expand...
There are already some programmes which use exercise as part of a patient's COVID-19 recovery.

One of these is the Newport Live COVID-19 recovery programme in Wales.

Created by the clinical team at Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, in partnership with Public Health Wales, the eight-week programme is operated at Newport Life-managed leisure facilities.
Click to expand...
"Each person needs a unique approach requiring psychological support, physiotherapy and lifestyle advice, as well as physical exercise," he told HCM.

"The aim is for those who have participated in the programme to continue to receive support and encouragement to remain active once the eight weeks conclude.

"I think the health and fitness industry is brilliantly placed to support rehabilitation and this situation is a game changer that the sector must embrace, especially as we don’t know how long the effects of COVID-19 will be with us."
Click to expand...
"Exercise is as specific as a drug in terms of how it works for people, what they need, when it can be undertaken and how it is prescribed and we need to start respecting it in this way," he said.

"There may be a need for clinical referral to exercise for former COVID-19 patients, so operators will need to make formal connections with referring NHS sites. As a sector we will also need to work on a standardised model of care delivery using PTs, who will need to be upskilled to deliver rehabilitation programmes.

"This model should enable processes to remain standardised and allow the specialist knowledge of the condition to be adapted over time. This way the model can be used to support the participants through other conditions as well."
Click to expand...
:banghead: It can, in fact, be overestimated.
 
Kalliope said:
Agree. There's still a long way to go. But Vogt's BPS-approach to the world won't automatically be accepted when the subject is something other than ME. This may come as a surprise to him. It's a small victory, but still..
Click to expand...
The more people he asks if they are saying they don't believe in psychological illness, the more I hope it become clear that BPS defenders are one trick ponies.

Ok two tricks, the BPS approach itself and the "opponents are afraid of the stigma of mental illness" deflection.
 
Reads more like an aspirational plan than anything. Basically a hammer demanding nails.


The Role of Rehabilitation in Individuals with Coronavirus COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review

https://gavinpublishers.com/article...h-coronavirus-covid-19-a-comprehensive-review

For adults quarantined at home, physical therapy should be mandatory. In most individuals with COVID-19, complications and disabilities could be prevented with physiotherapy. When isolated with COVID-19, the use of remote electronic devices for consultation and education can be very useful. Finally, physiotherapy in individuals who survived COVID 19 is of great importance to help them re-integrate into their daily lives.
Click to expand...
Individuals who are already in rehabilitation processes and are confined to quarantine, should be motivated to continue with their rehabilitation program established in the last session [29]. These individuals need to know that they have to be physically active and carry out exercise programs according to their needs, abilities and objectives proposed for each patient. Multicomponent exercise programs that involve aerobic resistance training, strengthening, flexibility, coordination and balance are recommended, they have to be individually prescribed, using the variables of volume, intensity, frequency and duration [30,31].

Regarding volume, international guidelines recommend doing at least 150 min / week of physical activity with moderate to vigorous intensity or approximately 450-900 METs min / week [31,32] , with a frequency of 5-7 days / week [33].

For aerobic resistance training, it is suggested to increase the frequency of sessions up to 5-7 days / week with an adaptation in the moderate intensity of the exercise (65-75% of the maximum heart rate or 40-60% of reserve of heart rate) and a volume of 200-400 min / week. Likewise, for strengthening programs it is suggested to be carried out a minimum of 2-3 days / week. Similarly, exercises that include balance, mobility, and coordination should be performed daily [34].
Click to expand...
Health professionals who respond to the coronavirus pandemic are the first line of patient care. Rehabilitation clinicians have an important role in implementing techniques and procedures of physiotherapy for increasing life expectancy and face challenges such as prevention of complications, future disabilities and sequelae in individuals with COVID-19; therefore, rehabilitation is essential and the use of internet technology and electronic devices are helpful tools to assist individuals with isolation and for those who are in the recovery period or prone to illness. Then, it is necessary to sensitize the population and health personnel on the role of physical therapy in individuals with COVID-19.
Click to expand...
Evidence-based medicine fails again. At this point it's beyond embarrassing, this is just an evidence laundering process where people just put out whatever they want to be true and others build on the same thing they want to be true.
 
To read those articles makes one suspect that the initiative involves people with highly developed muscles... particularly between the ears. we all recognise that the sector has been badly affected by lockdowns and quarantine, but it would help if vested, commercial interest were not so obvious.

Never look a gift milch cow, that lays the golden egg, in the mouth.
 
The Danes* at RecoveryNorge are at it again:



I especially love the fact that it is known that most people naturally recover from PVFS and so any such story is as irrelevant and unremarkable as people who recover from colds because of healing crystals or whatever.

* It's an inside joke between me and... probably another person, nevermind :p
 
There is more to unpack in that article so this is just for starters:

Of all the information out there that people with ME might wish everyone knew my present top choice is for someone somewhere to do a very clear study on recovery after getting ill with a virus (I know that's too vague). I would very much like it to generally be better understood that some people who have symptoms that linger past a few weeks will still recover without assistance and with adequate rest. And that others will not be so lucky.
 
rvallee said:
The Danes* at RecoveryNorge are at it again:



I especially love the fact that it is known that most people naturally recover from PVFS and so any such story is as irrelevant and unremarkable as people who recover from colds because of healing crystals or whatever.

* It's an inside joke between me and... probably another person, nevermind :p
Click to expand...

I was going to add :rofl: even before I read the asterisk. :rolleyes:

In her book "But you don't look ill" the author (who has ME) was told by her doctor that she would recover in ~three years after a postviral onset. Around that time she did start to feel better, got a job, and started living her life. Then she started to deteriorate again and eventually had to quit working.

I started to feel better after a few years myself, then had some next to normal years (I could get symptoms and I would feel there was something "there" if I pushed too hard.. but for most people not being as active they might not have noticed) and then crashed to be mostly homebound. I'm better than what I was that year, but it waxes and wanes. Last year I was able to be more active, so far this year my average step count is down 3000 from last year :(

Then again, I did not have a viral onset, the only virus they found was CMV which my mother told me most likely came from the hospital when I was born. A few years later it turned out I'd gotten EBV since I became ill, maybe the first years wasn't ME, then I got mono without realizing it and THEN got ME? Who knows.
 
I am in the process of rereading Osler's Web. I find that I had forgotten much of it. Last night I got to page 471 in the chapter "A Conspiracy of Dunces".

Anthony Fauci, director of the (NIAID), refused requests for an interview in the spring of 1991. According to a member of the Institute's public relations staff, Laurie Doepel, Fauci "didn't feel he had followed (CFS)" closely enough to be interviewed on the subject. Fauci's deputy assistant, James Hill, would be happy to talk about it, however, Doepel said. During an interview....Hill assured the interviewer he could speak for Anthony Fauci on the disease. When pressed for his boss's scientific views of the disease, Hill said, "Fauci wonders why the patients are so upset about being labeled with a psychiatric problem. I remember he said to me, "Haven't we come far enough along in our society that mental illness needn't carry a stigma?"

Hearsay evidence, I know, but he has had plenty of time to deny it.

Now, where have I hears that about stigmatisation of psychiatric illness before.
 
chrisb said:
Anthony Fauci, director of the (NIAID), refused requests for an interview in the spring of 1991. According to a member of the Institute's public relations staff, Laurie Doepel, Fauci "didn't feel he had followed (CFS)" closely enough to be interviewed on the subject. Fauci's deputy assistant, James Hill, would be happy to talk about it, however, Doepel said. During an interview....Hill assured the interviewer he could speak for Anthony Fauci on the disease. When pressed for his boss's scientific views of the disease, Hill said, "Fauci wonders why the patients are so upset about being labeled with a psychiatric problem. I remember he said to me, "Haven't we come far enough along in our society that mental illness needn't carry a stigma?"
Click to expand...

They didn't understand then and they don't understand now. It's not the stigma that we're upset about!
 
Snow Leopard said:
They didn't understand then and they don't understand now. It's not the stigma that we're upset about!
Click to expand...
Yes. People would get just as upset if they were misdiagnosed with cancer when they didn't have it. There would be no suggestion of stigmatising cancer patients. It is simply that misdiagnosis is hugely problematic in and of itself.
 
Last edited:
Snow Leopard said:
They didn't understand then and they don't understand now. It's not the stigma that we're upset about!
Click to expand...

Intentional or not, for the record, this acts as a classic "straw man" argument, i.e. a false premise used as an adversarial point of debate which the intellectually sloppy psychologists think they can win, instead of facing the real point, which would be the priority of anyone who had sincerely benign intentions.

In this case, falsely claiming ME patients are opposed to mischaracterisation of ME as mental illness because they are afraid of the stigma; when this is not the basis of the objection, which is that mischaracterisation leads to mistreatment, e.g. like faith based treatments for aggressive cancer, which not only don't work but are positively harmful because they cause patients not to get the treatment which could save them.

In ME its even worse than that, because some psychologists have even forced patients to do what makes them iller and on occasion caused death as a result, as happened to poor Sophia Mirza though there are many more accounts of PWME being made much iller, such as Karina Hansen.


WRT Anthony Fauci, I have been glad of his recent comparison of ME/CFS with longcovid, this sounds like someone who has latterly recognised the nature of the problem due to good advice from wise counsel.

It sounds to me as if his earlier approach reflected misinformation from the insurance backed psych lobby, trying to get their toe in the door of decision makers, which he has since discarded. I think the 1996 Mental Health Parity Act++ was a watershed moment regarding the political discussion over medical insurance motives in this matter, so the timing would make sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Parity_Act

I hope he might prove to be a valuable ally in the search for a rational approach to researching this kind of condition.
 
chrisb said:
I am in the process of rereading Osler's Web. I find that I had forgotten much of it. Last night I got to page 471 in the chapter "A Conspiracy of Dunces".

Anthony Fauci, director of the (NIAID), refused requests for an interview in the spring of 1991. According to a member of the Institute's public relations staff, Laurie Doepel, Fauci "didn't feel he had followed (CFS)" closely enough to be interviewed on the subject. Fauci's deputy assistant, James Hill, would be happy to talk about it, however, Doepel said. During an interview....Hill assured the interviewer he could speak for Anthony Fauci on the disease. When pressed for his boss's scientific views of the disease, Hill said, "Fauci wonders why the patients are so upset about being labeled with a psychiatric problem. I remember he said to me, "Haven't we come far enough along in our society that mental illness needn't carry a stigma?"

Hearsay evidence, I know, but he has had plenty of time to deny it.

Now, where have I hears that about stigmatisation of psychiatric illness before.
Click to expand...

That sounds very like someone who had very little knowledge of the disease being told by the "experts" from the CDC that there was controversy because it was a psychological disease but that patients were not happy to be told it was not physical. They are believed now and were even more likely to be believed then
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom