The Rise and Fall of the Psychosomatic Approach to MUS, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, 2022, David Marks

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic research - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Samuel, Dec 28, 2022.

  1. Samuel

    Samuel Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    634
    The Rise and Fall of the Psychosomatic Approach to Medically
    Unexplained Symptoms, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue
    Syndrome

    Free fulltext (preprint)
    https://psyarxiv.com/jpzaw/

    Citation: David F Marks. (2022). The Rise and Fall of the Psychosomatic Approach to Medically Unexplained Symptoms, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Arch Epidemiol Pub Health Res, 1(2), 97-143.

    Abstract

    The psychosomatic approach to medically unexplained symptoms, myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome (MUS/ME/CFS) is critically reviewed using scientific criteria.

    Based on the 'Biopsychosocial Model', the psychosomatic theory proposes that patients' dysfunctional beliefs, deconditioning and attentional biases cause or make illness worse, disrupt therapies, and lead to preventable deaths.

    The evidence reviewed suggests that none of these psychosomatic hypotheses is empirically supported.

    The lack of robust supportive evidence together with the use of fallacious causal assumptions, inappropriate and harmful therapies, broken scientific principles, repeated methodological flaws and an unwillingness to share data all give the appearance of cargo cult science.

    The psychosomatic approach needs to be replaced by a scientific, biologically grounded approach to MUS/ME/CFS that can be expected to provide patients with appropriate care and treatments.

    Patients with MUS/ME/CFS and their families have not been treated with the dignity, respect and care that is their human right.

    Patients with MUS/ME/CFS and their families could consider a class action legal case against the injuring parties.


    from tom kindlon

    Edit:
    The final, published version is here:
    https://www.opastpublishers.com/pee...lgic-encephalomyelitis-and-chronic--4899.html
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 28, 2022
    Lilas, Woolie, JohnTheJack and 21 others like this.
  2. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,562
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    That's unfortunate.


    That's not right.
    I'm grateful to David Marks for the work he has done to bring BPS proponents to account, but I think this paper would have benefitted from some feedback from a range of people.

     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2022
    boolybooly, DokaGirl, sebaaa and 9 others like this.
  3. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,257
    The final, published version is here:
    https://www.opastpublishers.com/pee...lgic-encephalomyelitis-and-chronic--4899.html


     
    DokaGirl, alktipping, Hutan and 6 others like this.
  4. Three Chord Monty

    Three Chord Monty Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    212
    I'm wondering why this is in a journal on Beall's list for having been flagged as predatory. I mean, I'm not sure that's the end-all or be-all (no pun intended) but on first glance this looks like something that could be significant & that's not usually a plus for a publication's credibility. Then again, lately we've seen quite a few papers that look like they might contain important contributions to the scientific literature in similarly scorned MDPI journals, so who knows.
     
    Woolie, DokaGirl, alktipping and 7 others like this.
  5. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    55,768
    Location:
    UK
    I have read most of it and would say it's a useful contribution to the historical record of what's gone wrong with ME/CFS research, specifically the adoption of the 'BPS model'.
     
  6. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    8,154
    Location:
    Australia
    Good paper to have in the drawer as a summary of what has gone wrong. Covers most of the significant issues.

    Important that this stuff is in the formal literature, where nobody can use the excuse that it hasn't been reported 'properly'.

    Thank you, David Marks.
     
    Lilas, inox, alktipping and 13 others like this.
  7. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,257
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2022
    alktipping, EzzieD, Sean and 4 others like this.
  8. DokaGirl

    DokaGirl Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,664
    Ditto!
     
    alktipping, EzzieD, Sean and 3 others like this.
  9. DokaGirl

    DokaGirl Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,664
    Noted in this paper, the practise of the insurance industry depending on this pseudoscientific model to deny benefits for legitimately ill people.

    I'd like to add that while the insurance industry accepts and supports an unproven model as scientific fact, what it normally or often demands from patients is objective proof of disability (e.g. biomedical tests).
     
  10. DokaGirl

    DokaGirl Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,664
    Attention bias discussed in the article, is of course viewed as a problem in other areas of health care.

    As in: Patient: "Doctor, could you order an MRI for my, fill in the blank pain?"

    Doctor: "No, if we find something wrong with your fill in the blank, you will focus on it too much."

    Given this view seems to be accepted by at least some in medicine, attention bias was likely aided in its acceptance as one of the main pillars of the PS theory of ME and MUS.

    ETA: added "attention bias" in second paragraph
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2022
    bobbler, Amw66, alktipping and 5 others like this.
  11. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,827
    Yes, I know David has been working on this for some time and put in a lot of work, so thank you.
     
    bobbler, ukxmrv, Lilas and 11 others like this.
  12. dave30th

    dave30th Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,453
    Does anyone know anything about the journal? The article was received on December 6th and accepted six days later. That's pretty quick!!
     
    Trish and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  13. SNT Gatchaman

    SNT Gatchaman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,872
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    This is the list of medical journals in their stable. I looked at a couple and quality is extremely poor. "Predatory" is probably an insufficient descriptor. Example is the World Journal of Radiology and Imaging. The current issue (at this time the only issue) lists the following papers —

    • Degenerative Lumber Spondylosis: An Educational Radiographs and Expert Therapeutic Recommendation
    • Aortic Disease in Neurology
    • Magnitude and Predictors of Anaemia among Pregnant women attending Antenatal Clinics in Dar es salaam, Tanzania
    • A girl from Pakistan with atypical autism: Expert opinion and a therapeutic recommendation
    • Dietary Calcium Intake and Associated Factors Among Pregnant Women in Loma District, South West Ethiopia, 2020
    • Highly Differentiated Human Airway Epithelial Cells Immunological Response to Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Human Rhinovirus C
    • An Extensive Evaluation and Meta-Analysis of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulations Effectiveness as a Treatment for Alzheimers Disease
    Editorial board here.

    At random, picking one that might actually involve some radiology and imaging: Aortic Disease in Neurology has the following abstract in its entirety

     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2023
    Trish, Peter Trewhitt and dave30th like this.
  14. dave30th

    dave30th Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,453
    This is unfortunate of course.
     
  15. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    55,768
    Location:
    UK
    Oh dear what a pity. It's a valuable article and deserves a more reputable publisher.
     
    bobbler, Josefina, Lilas and 5 others like this.
  16. Josefina

    Josefina Established Member

    Messages:
    4
    I agree with @Sean that it’s important that points made in Marks’ paper find their way into formal literature. In terms of the some of the political and historical aspects of ME/CFS (psychiatrists’ links with the insurance industry & UK government officials, the role of the UnumProvident Psychosocial Research centre at Cardiff university, UK welfare reform etc.), such points already existed in formal literature.

    I’ve written a few papers on the political underpinnings of ME, covering a fair amount of stuff (on the political side) that Marks has now written on:

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joanne-Hunt/research

    These papers were published some time before Marks submitted his paper. I decided to start submitting pieces on this subject a few years ago because for many years I saw a gap in the research – for whatever reason people were not writing on the dark political underbelly of ME. I had a lot of resistance from reviewers, even hostile and intimidatory reviewer comments (maybe that’s why people were not publishing?), but that made me more determined to get something published. To say it's been a struggle would be an understatement, being severely disabled, no funding and not having the credibility markers to be taken seriously.

    I also don’t understand why Marks would choose this journal, given how well published and respected he is – as others have indicated, it bears the cardinal signs of a so-called ‘predatory’ publisher. For example, as @Three Chord Monty indicated, it's on Beall's list, and as @dave30th pointed out, the time window between submission and acceptance is super short. It’s also not recognised by DOAJ, nor a member of OASPA – which isn’t necessarily an issue at all, but combined with the high APCs, and the ostensible size and reach of the publishers, it’s a warning sign. (As a researcher working largely on my own, I’ve almost fallen prey to predatory journals before, so I’m familiar with their ways). The APC is over $3,000 – that is an awful lot of money to part with for a journal that carries all these warning signs.
     
    bobbler, oldtimer, dave30th and 11 others like this.
  17. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,861
    I have an idea how hard it is and am grateful for your work on this.

    It frustrated me that Margaret Williams never seemed to submit anything for publication, not papers, letters or even (I believe) e-letters. I was grateful for her work, alone or with people like Malcolm Hooper, but I believe it would have had more impact if it had been published.
     
    ukxmrv, oldtimer, dave30th and 8 others like this.
  18. Josefina

    Josefina Established Member

    Messages:
    4
    Thanks Dolphin, I really appreciate that. And I agree ref the work of Hooper & Williams!
     
    Sean, oldtimer, bobbler and 3 others like this.
  19. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,962
    Location:
    UK
    incase anyone is interested they are on this thread
    https://www.s4me.info/threads/artic...m-eileen-marshall-1994-2007-and-others.13034/
     
  20. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    55,768
    Location:
    UK
    Josefina and Andy like this.

Share This Page