Another shockingly pointless Wessley publication: something must be done!
John Morgan's spoof rapid response can be interpreted in one of two
ways. On the one hand he could be saying that after a string of
controversial publications it is a shock to see Simon Wessley publish one
that is not controversial. On the other hand his response might simply be
a crude attempt to ridicule those patients who do not share Simon
Wessley's enthusiasm for his essentially psychologically based approach to
researching and treating ME. As Dr (Mr?) Morgan appears to be a British
psychiatrist who may actually know Simon Wessley personally, I strongly
suspect the latter.
Actually I agree with Dr Morgan, the study is essentially
uncontroversial. But ironically therein lies the problem. It is
uncontroversial precisely because it tells us absolutely nothing new about
this illness. Let's look at the findings:
* The study found a strong association between psychiatric disorder
and a diagnosis of ME or CFS. Well forgive me if I am underwhelmed by this
revelation! You would almost certainly find this association with any
chronic debilitating illness especially one of unknown aetiology with no
effective treatment or cure.
* The study also found that CFS is relatively rare amongst
children. At first glance this appears to be a significant finding.
However, as Chris Clark pointed out, the various definitions of CFS or ME
are designed primarily for researchers trying to find the cause or
effective treatments for the disease. Many of the children diagnosed with
non-CFS fatigue may actually have a mild form of CFS and share the same
underlying pathology as those diagnosed with CFS. I believe that the
results of any epidemiological studies will have to be treated with
extreme caution until a reliable biological marker has been found for this
illness.
Time after time in surveys carried out by self help groups and ME
charities, patients ask for more research to be done into the aetiology of
ME. What IS controversial is that so little research of this nature is
actually being done in the UK.
Rapid Response:
Another shockingly pointless Wessley publication: something must be done!
John Morgan's spoof rapid response can be interpreted in one of two
ways. On the one hand he could be saying that after a string of
controversial publications it is a shock to see Simon Wessley publish one
that is not controversial. On the other hand his response might simply be
a crude attempt to ridicule those patients who do not share Simon
Wessley's enthusiasm for his essentially psychologically based approach to
researching and treating ME. As Dr (Mr?) Morgan appears to be a British
psychiatrist who may actually know Simon Wessley personally, I strongly
suspect the latter.
Actually I agree with Dr Morgan, the study is essentially
uncontroversial. But ironically therein lies the problem. It is
uncontroversial precisely because it tells us absolutely nothing new about
this illness. Let's look at the findings:
* The study found a strong association between psychiatric disorder
and a diagnosis of ME or CFS. Well forgive me if I am underwhelmed by this
revelation! You would almost certainly find this association with any
chronic debilitating illness especially one of unknown aetiology with no
effective treatment or cure.
* The study also found that CFS is relatively rare amongst
children. At first glance this appears to be a significant finding.
However, as Chris Clark pointed out, the various definitions of CFS or ME
are designed primarily for researchers trying to find the cause or
effective treatments for the disease. Many of the children diagnosed with
non-CFS fatigue may actually have a mild form of CFS and share the same
underlying pathology as those diagnosed with CFS. I believe that the
results of any epidemiological studies will have to be treated with
extreme caution until a reliable biological marker has been found for this
illness.
Time after time in surveys carried out by self help groups and ME
charities, patients ask for more research to be done into the aetiology of
ME. What IS controversial is that so little research of this nature is
actually being done in the UK.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests