1. The 'News in Brief' post for w/c 19th August can be read here.
    Dismiss Notice

Petition: Review treatment of people with ME in Scotland

Discussion in 'Petitions' started by Emsho, Apr 26, 2018.

  1. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,257
    Likes Received:
    27,677
    Location:
    UK
    The issue of CBT/GET treatment and people being able to refuse it; if it's the recommended treatment how are they supposed to make an informed decision. At very least they should be warned of potential of it making them worse.
    Also have big concerns about AfME being 'in charge' of re-educating health professionals; this is something that should be done with consensus (particularly the content).
    Why don't AfME make it a group project and involve at least the others on the Forward ME group.
     
    Hutan, Esther12, Inara and 8 others like this.
  2. Andy

    Andy Committee Member & Outreach

    Messages:
    7,075
    Likes Received:
    52,580
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    My current random thoughts on it (more may come later):
    • Generally, I thought it seemed to go well. I don't know, obviously, if it went in the way that Emma and all the other pwME in Scotland wanted it to go but there seemed to be complete agreement that there is a problem that needs to be fixed.
    • As Sly Saint highlights above, the issues surrounding CBT & GET don't seem to be fully appreciated. The argument is still used that, as they benefit some people diagnosed with ME, they should be retained because we don't know who they will harm. My thought on that is what is the acceptable benefit/potential harm ratio? Just because it will potentially benefit what I would suggest is a minority of people diagnosed with ME, why does that make it acceptable to recommend it for the majority who it will potentially harm?
    • The Scottish Chief Medical Officer (I think that was her title), explicitly said that CBT and GET aren't cures. Yet, how often are they presented as such, either explicitly or implicitly?
    • Again, generally, there appeared to be an acceptance that there was still, even after 30 years, insufficient research to tell us anything meaningful about ME. Which surely highlights how the BPS crowd has failed the patient population - they've had all this time and money to research us and they've still failed (at least in benefiting us patients, they may well have benefited themselves in various ways).
     
    TiredSam, MSEsperanza, Simone and 5 others like this.
  3. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    14,799
    Likes Received:
    79,928
    Location:
    UK
    I thought it was disappointing.

    On CBT/GET
    There clearly is no intention to remove CBT/GET and the wishy washy stuff about patient consent and being allowed to stop if it's not helping is beside the point. If a treatment is offered, patients will want to try it, and won't know until it's too late that it has harmed them. And justifying not removing CBT/GET on the grounds that 'some people find them helpful' is appalling coming from someone speaking for the government on medical subjects. Hasn't she heard of science?

    Another concern - they quoted figures that 50% of GP's in Scotland don't believe ME exists, and 80% of neurologists don't believe it's a physical condition. The answer - we have written to the Scottish medical schools to ask them to include ME in their curriculum but we can't compel them to. And Action for ME is going to provide training modules. I hope that's not Hazel O'Dowd again...

    A bit about research funding with no promises made.

    A bit about improving care services for pwME in Scotland basing them on best practice. A nurse led service in Fife was mentioned.
     
    Hutan, Esther12, TiredSam and 6 others like this.
  4. Gecko

    Gecko Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    1,259
    Location:
    England
    Disappointed here too, but too much else going on today to try to properly write my thoughts down. Very much agree with what was said above, especially on CBT/GET. This isn't about individual patient choice but about the public health recommendations being made in Scotland.
     
  5. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,579
    Likes Received:
    24,359
    Location:
    UK East Midlands
    Sounds like too many of them are listening to AFME rather than MEAction.
     
    Esther12, Inara, Trish and 2 others like this.
  6. Andy

    Andy Committee Member & Outreach

    Messages:
    7,075
    Likes Received:
    52,580
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    An MEAction Scotland summary (in the form of a series of tweets) of today's meeting.

    Click on the tweet and it should then display them in order.
     
  7. MSEsperanza

    MSEsperanza Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    5,700
    Location:
    betwixt and between
    Malvern Gazette, 24.01.2019
    (Press Association)
    https://www.malverngazette.co.uk/ne...tary-pledges-more-support-for-people-with-me/

     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2019
    Esther12 and Andy like this.
  8. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,949
    Likes Received:
    51,826
    This is certainly of concern if government agencies are defending policy on these grounds. These are not considered acceptable grounds for recommendation in any branch of medicine. I think a more closely argued case may be needed. I have written a document in which I have concluded that the provision of both CBT and GET is unethical - for different reasons in each case. It has to do with dishonesty in both cases though. I need to think about this a bit more.
     
    Hutan, RuthT, Esther12 and 11 others like this.
  9. TiredSam

    TiredSam Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    Likes Received:
    29,930
    Location:
    Germany
    Is it just me or is AfME doing more harm than good, just as they always have done? It's getting very frustrating that again and again, just when we get the ears of the right people, AfME get in there and give them the wrong information, harmful to PwME, and pick up large amounts of money for doing so (did I hear 300,000 going to AfME in the House of Commons debate yesterday?) AfME are a part of the problem, masquerading as part of the solution.

    Still, at least they pop in here for an hour once a week to "engage". Perhaps, with a bit of support and encouragement, they might feel able to gradually increase that, and actually start listening and taking action on the concerns of the people they are supposed to represent. Or perhaps that's as realistic a hope as gradually increasing activity for PwME leading to any improvement.
     
  10. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,257
    Likes Received:
    27,677
    Location:
    UK
    was a couple of years ago (Scotland)
    https://www.actionforme.org.uk/news...-health-and-social-care-in-scotland-launched/

    another leaflet that needs 'reviewing'
    https://www.actionforme.org.uk/uploads/managing-me-a-guide-for-gps-in-scotland.pdf

    eta:
     
  11. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,150
    Likes Received:
    17,527
    Location:
    Canada
    MSEsperanza and Esther12 like this.
  12. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    967
    Likes Received:
    10,092
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
  13. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    14,799
    Likes Received:
    79,928
    Location:
    UK
    Looks like it's the same Associated Press article in the Scotsman and the Malvern Gazette. I think I saw it was in the Mail online too.

    Is there a link so people can watch the meeting afterwards?
     
    MSEsperanza, Esther12 and rvallee like this.
  14. SallyC

    SallyC Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    1,057
    MSEsperanza, Esther12, JohnM and 2 others like this.
  15. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    26,117
    Got to agree with all of the concerns raised here about Action for ME's involvement. It sounds as if they're undermining other groups efforts to make progress (not saying this is intentional), and what do we get from them? Seminars for GPs from Hazel O'Dowd?!

    http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=11911&i=107684
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2019
    MSEsperanza and Trish like this.
  16. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,949
    Likes Received:
    51,826
    I am sorry to see the level of the discussion in the transcript. I note that I have been misquoted - We took evidence from Professor Jonathan Edwards and, although I do not want to put words in his mouth, my reading of what he said is that there is almost a false correlation—because people benefit from the treatment, the implication is that ME patients benefit from the treatment, - and speakers on both sides of the argument seem to have completely misunderstood the problem (that there is no evidence that CBT or GET work for anyone). It seems extraordinary to me that I spelled out the depth of the problem in no uncertain terms in my written submission and it is as if neither side had read any of it!
     
  17. MSEsperanza

    MSEsperanza Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    5,700
    Location:
    betwixt and between
    Press Association - not Associated Press. ;)
     
    Trish likes this.
  18. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,257
    Likes Received:
    27,677
    Location:
    UK
    As long as the 'leading charity for pwME' keeps saying it helps 'some people' that misguided argument will continue.
     
    NelliePledge, Hutan, Inara and 5 others like this.
  19. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,949
    Likes Received:
    51,826
    Yes, I hear what the others are saying.
    Is AfME really just a government-sponsored PR campaign? Who funds it? Who are the scientific and medical advisors?
     
    rvallee, Amw66, Andy and 2 others like this.
  20. Sasha

    Sasha Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,048
    Likes Received:
    19,375
    Location:
    UK
    Current medical advisors are Prof Julia Newton and Dr Gregor Purdie:

    https://www.actionforme.org.uk/about-us/our-medical-advisers/

    I can't see who their scientific advisers are and I expect the funding is in a report somewhere but it's not immediately visible on the website.
     
    rvallee, strategist and Andy like this.

Share This Page