There's certainly much to be done there. I wonder who is on that 'specific working group'.In its letter, NHS England reported having established “a specific working group to determine if additional support can be provided to commissioners of ME/CFS services,” with the first step being “a stock take of existing CFS/ME services in England.” The use of the term CFS/ME in this context is interesting—a tacit acknowledgement, perhaps, that many local NHS trusts have failed to implement NICE’s 2021 ME/CFS guidelines adequately, if at all.
It's titled 'Trail by Error'!
They are under no obligation to replyREGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
1. Andrew Gwynne / Wes Streeting Department of Health and Social care
2. NHS England
3. NICE
4. Medical Research Council
5. National Institute for Health care and Research
6. Medical Schools Council
I wonder if all these bodies have responded eg the Medical Schools Council needs to ensure that training is brought up to date. Do we know anything about this?

I wonder if all these bodies have responded eg the Medical Schools Council needs to ensure that training is brought up to date. Do we know anything about this?
Deckchairs .. titanicI am expecting a final delivery plan by March. I doubt there will be any substance to it though. During the consultation process there was no recognition of any need for any change in approach to care.
It's titled 'Trail by Error'!
Actually, they are under an obligation to issue a response to the coroner. They're just not under an obligation to take any meaningful action; they could also take some action that was less than meaningful, or explain why they thought no action was necessary.They are under no obligation to reply
Ah yes! They are under no obligation to act. They can reply to say we’re taking no action. I stand corrected.Actually, they are under an obligation to issue a response to the coroner. They're just not under an obligation to take any meaningful action; they could also take some action that was less than meaningful, or explain why they thought no action was necessary.
A huge problem with the PFD system.
Sorry Dave, it’s the final delivery plan now, not the interim one, I guess Andrew wrote the letter so long ago that it’s changed since?Fixed!!
They all seem to have except for NIHR.
Have you seen the response from the Medical Schools Council?
Yes, I have five of the responses. I'll post them later today.
This is an important issue. The mismatch between what is actually known about our condition and what the majority of professionals in the UK supposedly supporting us believe, and the bizarre language games they play to maintain their unevidenced beliefs.
You could put the slides on the BACME thread or if you thought they would form the basis of a useful discussion start a separate thread just for them.
MRC said that:The second session will focus on management in primary care, covering personalised activity plans, concomitant conditions, such as mast cell activation syndrome and postural tachycardia syndrome, the psychological impact of being diagnosed with the condition, and what is not ME/CFS. The third session will cover management in secondary care, focusing on patients with more severe ME/CFS that require hospitalisation. This includes information on treatments and their potential benefits and risks, management of a patient who requires hospital admission, provision of a minimum stimuli environment, and support for healthcare professionals
I wasn't aware of that. Anyone know anything more about this engagement?MRC continues to engage with researchers, patient representatives and charity funders to identify routes to catalyse biomedical research in this area
The second medical school's response was also underwhelming:Response 1 said:We have a learning event in Year 1, in which students will learn about the clinical features, proposed pathophysiological mechanisms and biopsychosocial interventions for management for chronic fatigue syndrome/ME, fibromyalgia and post-covid syndrome. The students will build on this session in subsequent years. We think it is important to highlight the burden associated with these diseases and sequalae that can occur.
The MSC did, however, copy in the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges and the GMC (which I was surprised the coroner omitted).Response 2 said:In our curriculum we do cover CFS and chronic widespread pain. We have teaching materials on it in the Y4 Musculoskeletal and in the GP block and we cover the important area of differential diagnosis for fatigue
and seem to be interested in developing an update to the NICE CKS:• Review the evidence on dietary management and strategies for people with severe or very severe ME/CFS published since NG206 was introduced to determine if any specific amendments to the guideline are needed in this area.
• work with colleagues from the Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust to see if there are examples of good practice that we can link to from our guideline pages.
• consider appropriate amendments to the guideline on ME/CFS to emphasise the need for appropriate nutritional support
Interesting elements of the NHS England response:Additionally, we are already working with colleagues from our external supplier that produces NICE Clinical Knowledge Summaries (CKS) to determine if any updates to the section on fatigue are possible.
and:In addition, NHS England has also established a specific working group to determine if additional support can be provided to commissioners of ME/CFS services. A stock take of existing CFS/ME services in England is being undertaken as an initial step.
We understand that RDUH are in the process of developing formal pathways for acute admission and emergency admission for patients with ME/CFS and that the details of these will be shared with the Coroner by the Trust