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 8th April 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Do Women With Severe Persistent Fatigue Present With Fatigue at the Primary Care Consultation?, 2020, olde Hartman et al

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic research - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Dolphin, May 24, 2020.

  1. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    This type of research on ME/CFS patients in theory might be interesting, though I have no idea what this paper is like.


    chronic fatigue syndrome, fatigue, primary care, retrospective studies, questionnaire

  2. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Perhaps researchers should step.into someone's shoes for a week and experience life .

    If you are unemployed and of lower education then life is probably one that is incomprehensible to researchers. Women are often the glue that holds fragile, stressful situations together and can suffer for it. I have no problem comprehending that they would be knackered, and that persistent fatigue carries other health possibilities. The fact that they keep turning up perhaps should be seen as something is wrong, they don't necessarily know what, but expect some expertise to be applied

    Fatigue is a woolly term . Presentation at primary care provider can be an asymmetrical power balance. Then of course there is the possibility, highlighted often here, that go records are dangerously inaccurate.

    If GPs don't listen and don't record accurately is it any wonder things are missed .
    From a twitter thread from a # pwme. A number of missed , treatable diagnoses , could be equally applicable for many others

  3. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    If you take a sampling of patients from a GP practice, it's obviously going to skew results by not factoring in those who have simply given up trying to get a GP to do their job. This is bad inference. Especially as it's typically advised that unless there are specific reasons for it, healthy young people do not need to take regular appointments with a GP. In my country I think it's only around 50 that GPs are advised to make regular check-ups. When I got sick, I had not seen my GP in something like 6 years. This is pretty typical and it's expected that sick people would naturally have more contact with health care than healthy people advised not to do that unless necessary.
    And this is the explanation. Patients who would be categorized in this "with severe fatigue" get the message that they are not welcome and give up. Which happens to literally be the point of doing that, the entire premise for this approach is to exclude those patients from medical practice because they are too expensive and annoying and we get the damn message that we are not welcome.

    And then there's the fact that there is no such thing as being diagnosed with severe fatigue, or even fatigue. It's a symptom, not a diagnosis. So that's hardly surprising because unlike anxiety, which is equally untestable, does get "diagnosed" even though it consists of nothing more than "are you anxious?" "I guess" "OK then a diagnosis of anxiety it is".

    Nevermind that, again, fatigue is rarely ever the only symptom and almost never the most significant one, it's the obsessive focus of zealots that created this artificial supercategory out of the most common symptom in all of medicine.
    Other than being officially advised, you mean? That seems pretty clear. It's literally advised. I'm not sure what could possibly be hard to understand here. When you insult people over something they stop bringing it up. The insults are explicitly on purpose based on a belief system meant to discourage exactly this. The response is obviously not to bring it up, in part because it immediately becomes the obsessive focus from a psychological waste of efforts.

    It seems like this could get somewhere but it's hard to tell without the full paper. So close to getting it, still struggling with basic cognitive dissonance, though.
    Simbindi, Squeezy, Amw66 and 4 others like this.
  4. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Just out of interest I clicked on each name in the first quote box in post #1. The first three names only returned the paper shown in post #1. The fourth name returned 8545 results. I'm not sure what this is telling me!
    alktipping and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  5. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Since it's research on primary care, perhaps the first three are GP's not normally involved in research.
  6. Grigor

    Grigor Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Last edited: May 24, 2020

Share This Page