Discussion in 'Health News and Research unrelated to ME/CFS' started by Andy, Dec 5, 2019.
This was also reported on Radio 4 Today and the NHS representative advised the these "hidden" waiting lists are published regularly and that the majority of patients recover significantly. Only one of the people from this article was included in the piece.
response from Dr Mike Scott cbt watch
BBC Chooses To Ignore Talking Therapies 10% Recovery Rate
I asked recently if I could get some help with psychological issues (not serious - just coping with being ill, etc.) and got told if I wanted to sit down with an actual psychologist it would be 'years'.
My GP wrote to the mental health team and asked about other options. Of course all that's available is Talking Therapies. I've had it before. It's crap. Nonsense. Just end up on the phone to someone scoring your anxiety or depression symptoms on a not-fit-for-purpose questionnaire and then totting up the scores to see if they are higher or lower than last time. Crap. Total crap. It's like going on one of those pointless courses at work.
Uh, yeah, this is a blatant lie. It's a subtle lie but it is blatant nonetheless, the least of which is a definition of "recovery" that is meaningless.
Politicians lie, this is expected, but for medical authorities it's scandalous.
Literally the entire aim of BPS and it fails miserably at it, in addition to making everything else works. The entire premise is that it may not address the symptoms themselves but it makes people better equipped to deal with them, making them mentally more resilient, while improving access to those who actually need counseling. Literally does the opposite on all counts. Spectacular job, Simon and friends. This is world-class level of incompetence.
Here in BC we only have access to psychiatrists through our medical system. If you want to see a psychologist you have to pay privately. I was told years ago that the wait list to see a psychiatrist is over a year.
he wrote a blog in sept:
IAPT 2019: Still failing to thrive?
[ironically re-tweeted by MS]
further comment from Mike Scott
I'm trying to grasp the thought process here and... I can't. Other than maybe on the notion that throwing even more money at it will make it magically work, which is pretty much the basis of all of Sharpe and Wessely's research, that it may not work on a small scale but maybe going all in will somehow make it work, giving it the "boost" of confidence that is needed to overcome the flawed perception from patients that prevents it from working. "[C]hronic attrition and manipulation of outcome data" is certainly their bread and butter.
Sunk cost is a very expensive monster to feed. I do wonder when the dam will break. Given that all of Wessely's accomplishments were entirely speculative and aspirational, I also wonder if that's what will do to actually look at his track record, not on the promises that it made but on their almost universal failure.
When I first became sick my GP, who also had a psychology degree, figured everything was anxiety. He was an idiot. When I asked for second opinion, he would only refer me his friend the psychiatrist in Vancouver and only if I promised to take any med he offered no questions asked. He also told me there was no psychiatrists in Langley/Surrey area just in Vancouver. Obviously I didn't agree. I found another doctor and got a referral to one in my area. It took about a month. I also went to Mental Health while waiting. Your right there is no psychologist to see payed for by MSP. They only offer group CBT. Had the person assessing me felt I actually did have a mental health issue she could have got me in sooner to see a psychiatrist.
Separate names with a comma.