1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Cochrane Review: 'Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome' 2017, Larun et al. - Recent developments, 2018-19

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS news' started by Trish, Jun 18, 2019.

  1. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,602
    …. and they like to think of themselves as sceptics?
     
    rainy, JaneL, inox and 9 others like this.
  2. Hoopoe

    Hoopoe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,234
    Maybe they think like this:

    Medically unexplained symptoms are a somatoform disorder but we don't say that openly.
    Hope, motivation and positive expectations treat the sick mind.
    A bogus treatment is an acceptable way to deliver hope, motivation and positive expectations (placebo effect).
    It doesn't matter how weird the bogus treatment is as long as it helps.
    Spin, outcome switching, etc are all good for patients because a positive message enhances expectations.
    People don't believe in our ideas so we have to keep them secret and make up some semi-credible explanations for what we're actually doing.

    This would actually explain a lot.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2019
    Sean, JaneL, MSEsperanza and 22 others like this.
  3. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,674
    Location:
    UK
    I am sceptical that they can do so with much success.
     
  4. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,299
    Location:
    Canada
    I may be cynical, but I expect that most "skeptics" would see nothing wrong with using LP for ME because most don't really think there's anything wrong with us and so anything goes.

    The mistake sits at the very core of the issue: that everything done to us is by definition harmless, no matter what, no matter by whom. It just follows from then that X, whatever X is, will always be fine as long as it can influence some to shake off the delusion of believing there is something wrong with us.

    When you believe that rights do not apply to some, any question about whether a specific right is being violated is meaningless since it is accepted that no rights apply.

    This is the true harm behind the psychosocial model: it gives full license for anyone to abuse us since it is accepted that we are OK to abuse.
     
    rainy, JaneL, Trish and 19 others like this.
  5. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,299
    Location:
    Canada
    That is my interpretation as well. Everything is fair game and testimony of harm can be safely dismissed with prejudice since it is assumed that no harm is possible. This is the basis of "rousing reassurance": you can BS all you want as long as you BS with confidence, and don't hold back since you can do no wrong here.
     
    JaneL, Trish, inox and 5 others like this.
  6. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,273
    Location:
    London, UK
    One is tempted to add the concept of psychosomatic treatment to psychosomatic research. It seems like a real physical treatment (research) but it is really all created in the mind of the therapist.
     
    JaneL, TrixieStix, Sarah94 and 15 others like this.
  7. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes, it is important to consider their mindset.

    Psychiatrists consider the mind most important, that is to say the most important thing is to have the patient to say they are better (at least somewhat). It does not matter if the patient is still ill and that their thoughts saying they are better are transiently biased and does not reflect the reality of their level of functioning. The belief that patients are ill is the problem.

    It is not merely that they ignore bias of unblinded studies, they actually believe that such bias of perception is the goal.

    The second most important thing, and a corollary of the first is to avoid saying that there is nothing that can be done to help patients. These are the type of people who like to talk about "the powerful placebo effect" and so they perceive the biggest poison to be the lack of hope (and related emotions) that would result if patients are told, hey, most people stay severely ill and there is nothing we can do beyond the generic health advice that applies to everyone in our society (appropriate sleep, diet, hygiene, activity, avoid risky behaviour and staying mentally healthy).
     
    JaneL, Trish, Sarah94 and 11 others like this.
  8. Hoopoe

    Hoopoe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,234
    Once the hope turns out to be false hope, and the patient understands that providing false hope to patients like them is the only real plan pursued by the healthcare system, hopelessness and despair sets in.
     
    rainy, JaneL, Trish and 18 others like this.
  9. Unable

    Unable Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    193
    Location:
    UK
    So which would patients prefer:
    a false hope that will certainly be dashed (and the patient blamed), or
    an honest appraisal of the situation?

    There can still be “hope”, even whilst no treatment exists and prognosis is poor, but that requires a medical profession that does not fob the patient off with platitudes, and a dedication to honest research.
     
  10. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,044
    Location:
    Australia
    Wessely has explicitly stated he considers psychiatry to be the core of medicine, or the most important branch of medicine, or something to that effect.
     
    Trish, Sarah94, MEMarge and 5 others like this.
  11. feeb

    feeb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    155
    Location:
    London, UK
    Yes, this is how I see it. Sceptics are already sceptical of us. The fact that the LP "works" is just more evidence to them that we're a bunch of woo-woo hysterical middle-aged women, so no need to look any further or bother debunking anything.

    The sceptic community has been worse than useless on M.E. Being convinced of one's own rationality is a hell of a drug.
     
    rainy, JaneL, Trish and 18 others like this.
  12. EzzieD

    EzzieD Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    532
    Location:
    UK
    Yes, he's stated it to be 'at the heart of medicine' in various sources, such as here https://www.kingshealthpartners.org/latest/855-new-royal-society-of-medicine-president and here https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329850-400-we-need-shrinks-in-hospital-emergency-rooms/ .

    (ETA: I would have expected science to be at heart of medicine, but never mind, silly me!)
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  13. Skycloud

    Skycloud Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,187
    Location:
    UK
    I wonder what he would be saying if he were a podiatrist.
     
    JaneL, Trish, Sarah94 and 6 others like this.
  14. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,602
    Something's afoot. But I know not what.
     
    JaneL, Arnie Pye, Sarah94 and 13 others like this.
  15. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,273
    Location:
    London, UK
    pull the other one
     
    JaneL, MEMarge, Hutan and 8 others like this.
  16. Skycloud

    Skycloud Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,187
    Location:
    UK
    ‘I have the sole-lution toe to everything.’ He’d say, archly.

    To comment a little further I Don’t know Wessley, obviously, but to saying that psychiatry is at the centre of medicine makes me think well he would say that wouldn’t he. Just Coincidentally he’s at the heart of (uk) psychiatry.
     
    JaneL, Trish, Sarah94 and 9 others like this.
  17. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,674
    Location:
    UK
    As I understand it to do so would probably be considered common assault in the current climate.
     
  18. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,273
    Location:
    London, UK
    I see what you did. What if the climate changes?
     
  19. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,674
    Location:
    UK
    My answer to that could be viewed as political and therefore outside the scope of this forum ;)
     
    Amw66, MEMarge, Hutan and 5 others like this.
  20. large donner

    large donner Guest

    Messages:
    1,214
    The sceptic community online groups are extremely unlikely to have a true sceptic at the head of the group. There's more likely to be a grand master that draws in repeaters and haters.

    They are just online w****ers who alternate between online w****ing and online "scepticism", if you get my play on words.

    They most likely live in a bedroom or the basement of their parents house and use a desktop they built themselves from an old Atari game system and a bunch of modified hard drives.

    Basement W***ers!
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019

Share This Page