Patients with severe ME/CFS need hope and expert multidisciplinary care, 2025, Miller et al

I didn't realise that he was that far gone. Where next? The National Trust handbook, the Village Voice, My Builder....

 

You are missing the psychology here, @Trish. This was a pure Freudian meta-slip by Garner. It is exactly what he meant. The activists must be punished from all sides for disbelieving his own magic powers in self-healing.

 

@Robert 1973

Two German ME/CFS activists said on bluesky to me they have submitted a rapid response they wrote that focuses on the Swiss study (suicidal thoughts one)

 

You'd think here would be the obvious place, wouldn't you? For anyone who was serious about it.

But if they were anxious only to hear the echoes of their own ravings, they probably would prefer shouting into wells.

 

@dave30th

it appears to be another name that the American Psychophysiologic Disorders Association is using (Endchronicpain.org is one of the other ones they seem to have ) - I don't know whether anyone has heard of Schubiner, Clarke or Rob Munger who are apparently the co-founders.

https://www.s4me.info/threads/patie...re-2025-miller-et-al.44129/page-7#post-609673

 

He’s one of the people involved in PRT - it’s complete pseudoscience.
https://www.s4me.info/threads/effec...ck-pain-an-rct-2021-asher-gordon-et-al.22612/

 

My Builder

 

I know.

There's Total Carp as well.

 

Thanks. I thought it a good opportunity to cite the factsheet, as well as link to the Dialogues films on PEM.

 

I think their interpretation is even more disturbing. They noticed and understand that psychosomatic ideology is the main factor in despair and suicides for this illness, but they think that it's just a messaging (or comprehension on our part) problem, that it's because the patients don't accept/understand their meaning, won't commit to following its model, that leads to despair and suicide. This is why they have no problem using Maeve's name, their assertion is that had she followed their advice, she would be living free and healthy right now. Regardless of the fact that she did, their ideology has a permanent excuse for everything: she didn't try it just right, didn't find the Goldilocks zone.

To them the problem isn't psychosomatic ideology causing suicides, it's patients who accurately interpret psychosomatic models as a dead-end, where they understand it as the solution, which if we did we would simply resume our normal lives and no one would despair or kill themselves. So to them the solution to the problem is the problem, which conveniently happens to be their superior expertise.

It's all over the place in the literature, the belief that psychosomatic medicine hasn't actually been given the opportunity to prove itself. It's always presented as novel and never-before-tried, despite decades, thousands of studies and tens of millions subjected to it, to them it's No True Psychosomatic Medicine because they think that their model hasn't been correctly applied, just needs to be researched more and more and more. A model that would cease and desist all medical considerations, research and clinical options, leaving only the psychobehavioral, which they still think they can optimize by communicating it properly, or getting us to understand it properly, whatever works.

It's a very disturbing perspective, especially in that it's widely accepted in the medical profession, that psychosomatic (or psychobehavioral) medicine is the true future of medicine, one so powerful it would eliminate the need for most medical treatments and drugs, it just hasn't been given its proper chance. It's a completely nihilistic perspective, one that is mindlessly cruel and a textbook example of the banality of evil, but they believe in it, and will not let it go, they're already decades- and millions- deep into it so they don't have a choice. The boats have been burned, they will either prosper on this land, or die there, millions have already died for it so no one can turn back and face justice for it.

 

I noticed this when looking at fields like “Philosophy of Medicine”. I was expecting it to be all critical of both systems of power in medicine and psychiatry. But what I found was that the dominant narrative is that everything is too “medicalised” and we need a more “holistic” (read. psychobehavioural) approach to health.

 

I don't think it's a coincidence that there are other lobbies that think there is too much government and there should be more freedom.

It's all part of the same ideology.

 

Yet, psychiatry, which they are promoting, is intimately linked to state power.

So I think we should ask, freedom from what?

 

Meaningful treatment?

Just as small government means freedom from health & safety and equality legislation, minimum wages, food standards, environmental protections, etc.

I don't think this is psychiatry. It's the school of psychology that considers conditions like ME/CFS to be largely self-imposed; products of aberrant thinking. People shouldn't expect support to maintain their state of neediness and helplessness.

 

Ahh so the neoliberal “wellness culture” everything can be prevented by meditating and taking supplements philosophy

 

Here it is:

https://www.bmj.com/content/389/bmj.r977/rr-8

 

There is a BPS-oriented response by a practitioner in Scottland. At least it makes it easier to know who to avoid for the locals..

 

“Certified Lifestyle Medicine Physician”
I want to see a Doctor not an Instagram Influencer

 

I think «lifestyle medicine» is just specialisation that is very BPS-heavy and «holistic».

 

The comment from 'Xu Qi' looks like AI.