I don't see how it could be considered a patient is choice, no more than lactose intolerance doesn't imply someone choose to be intolerant to lactose.Can you think of a way to express it that isn't ambiguous in terms of it being a patient's choice?
[...] while people who think 'I have no idea, it looks like a complete mess' are less likely to feel they have much to contribute.
I’ve been working on the Chronic Illness Inclusion Project (though I have to stop working unfortunately). Something we’ve been trying on for size is the term Energy Limiting Chronic Illness. The concept comes from trying to find a non niche alternative to the term Spoonie. I thought that what Spoon Theory describes is actually limited energy, rather than fatigue. And fatigue isn’t necessarily a synonym of lack of energy.I like the concept of of a specific category based around exertion intolerance
No probably not yet. It’s just how I feel right now. MehDo we know that that's what it is?
Yes, I like ME/SEID more than ME/CFS. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is a terrible name: it is too easy to think fatigue is the main problem. Lots in the medical establishment aren’t going to accept “myalgic encephalomyelitis” on its own any time soon.I get a strong sense of this being important. In one way the dual term ME/CFS has an advantage, certainly for the research community and perhaps for the patient community, in reminding everyone that naming is a compromise because it is still very unclear what it should .f
I like the concept of of a specific category based around exertion intolerance but I am not very keen on systemic or disease. Maybe ME/SEID would be a way to go - gently.
Yes, I like ME/SEID more than ME/CFS.
I think it would be very unpopular with some people to try to drop ME at this time.I think we've had ME/CFS for so long that we've forgotten how weird it is to have a two-component name. I don't think another one would do us any favours.
I think it would be very unpopular with some people to try to drop ME at this time.
Well, I think ME/SEID would be preferable to ME/CFS and doesn't require the science to move forward. It would be great to drop "chronic fatigue syndrome".I agree - it looks like we're stuck until the science moves forward.
Systemic Metabolic Insufficiency
To me, Mr. Sharpe said it quite clearly: For him CFS and ME are not equal. Actually he said this several times on Twitter. This could include the admission that CFS was their invention, in the end. He seems to refer to Oxford-CFS and whatever-ME; because in PACE they used the Oxford criteria.My opinion is that CFS has become a brand and as a consequence it has become easy for doctors to dump everything under it so there are many underinvestigated and unkown diseases under it including ME.
When it comes to "CFS/ME" trials they just select people they think have the most potential to benefit from their chosen treatments, if that doesn't happen they just cook the books on the study then roll out their false conclusions for all "CFS".
It suits the medical system so it just continues.
It's hardly surprising they are confused though, when the likes of MS, NICE, etc, speak of CFS-also-known-as-ME, CFS/ME, and yet MS seems himself to be very confused/forgetful when he then says in the next breath CFS and ME are not the same thing. Talk about identity crisis.I was diagnosed with ME by a GP in the UK in 1990. About a year ago, I was in my doctor's office and glanced at the computer screen, and saw 'Chronic fatigue syndrome' on the screen as my main diagnosis.
I had a home optician visit and was asked my diagnosis. I said ME. He said, ''Do you mind if I write that down as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, it's easier to spell?''
I was too exhausted from the eye test to object and explain.
I think the word has gone around the UK medical establishment that when you hear 'ME' from a patient, you write down 'CFS'.