1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

MUST Fight MUS

Discussion in 'Advocacy Projects and Campaigns' started by Allele, Feb 25, 2018.

Tags:
  1. jeckylberry

    jeckylberry Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    46
    Totally agree. They are sociopaths - no empathy. If they think you’re a waste of time or your symptoms are boring they will make up a good reason why they don’t have to bother with you, even come up with a way to prevent you from bothering them again.
     
    Squeezy, Inara, TiredSam and 5 others like this.
  2. Inara

    Inara Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,734
    That's what strikes me, often, too. But it seems, in my experience, many doctors don't seem to be very keen on problem solving, or being a detective and so... To me, this is quite vitalizing. But people are different.
     
    Graham, Samuel, Squeezy and 5 others like this.
  3. jeckylberry

    jeckylberry Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    46
    I wonder about the ‘too hard basket’. I said before they’re disinterested but I wonder if it’s more like discouragement as well as disinterest. Or one informs the other. We had a problem when innocuous notes like ‘unexplained symptoms’ and ‘funny turns’ became MUS. The stronger MUS and the often ensuing FND is emphasised as being diagnostic canon, the stronger they provide a reference point to which patients with these symptoms can be steered. If doctors don’t do this then they would be generally considered, not as looking for answers, but as looking for alternative answers.

    So: Doctors making the ‘mistake’ of going down the rabbit hole of searching for an alternative diagnosis will find themselves in a maze of possibilities. They will be ordering myriad tests that will show nothing, spending time (wasting time), spending money (wasting money) puzzling over and consulting and referring to specialist after specialist who will all send the patient back with the same shake of the head. Many will be the days, weeks, months of flustering over this patient as they get sicker, wondering how to help them. And all the time they’re sitting there saying help me help me, Oh, busy GP - Do you want that??

    Or do you want the Gilderoy Lockhart of neurology to sweep your patient away, give them a onceover with his discerning eye and declare them to be prime candidates for their program of recovery? It’s guaranteed to work IF the patient truly wants to get better.

    As long as there are acceptable solutions for the practitioner that don’t involve endless negative tests they will be passively pressured to take them. Not knowing is undesirable because of the consequences, especially in the face of an obvious route to diagnosis. In these cases they probably feel they are are not at liberty to investigate so they do a half arsed job of it at most. This pressure does make sense from a time and money perspective, too. It’s not just that they don’t like to say ‘I don’t know’, but that they don’t like to say ‘I disagree,” because by saying “I disagree,” they are also facing that potential threat of being on shaky ground if they had to explain themselves.

    The importance of preventing fallacies from assuming canonical status is what we are grappling with here. It’s like fighting on the battleground of doctors minds, closing gates on them and opening others. If we had weapons of diagnostic tests that would be very much more helpful.

    I think there is a lot of merit in demanding real science not PACE-based treatments. Bring those two concepts into the same sentence. It is better to fight a gap like MUS with something positive, like a demand for 2-day CPET testing to become more routine, than fighting a space with more space. As others have said, fighting MUS by saying we’re not in that category is allowing for the category. They are fighting us with the ‘functional’ diagnosis and treatment. We can’t let everything get sucked into that abyss. That ain’t no rabbit hole.
     
  4. arewenearlythereyet

    arewenearlythereyet Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,092
    Whilst I agree with most of what you have said. One thing that occurs is that there may be a contradiction in our arguments. We are arguing against GET being a treatment that doesn’t help patients and can make them worse. The 2 day CPET is a diagnostic tool potentially but what about the potential harm of this and is there actually a recognised diagnostic criteria for ME using this test yet anyway?

    Are we not undermining the first argument by suggesting this before research proves its efficacy?
     
  5. ME3

    ME3 Established Member

    Messages:
    14
    Is there a list of MUTs i.e. Medically Unexplained Trials? Just a suggestion. I've heard of a young person going through all the treatments to prepare for stem cell treatment and then refusing, as they had been convinced that complementary treatments would cure them. Even though all the doctors were telling them it was terminal and only weeks would remain without the transplant treatment. They have since decided to go ahead. I don't know the out come.

    If all the charities were made aware of how they are being included under MH, MUS and only BPS is the answer, does this mean withdrawal of expensive drugs, as many are already being denied as too expensive.

    I believe, perhaps wrongly that people are being encouraged to stop taking unnecessary drugs e.g. antidepressants, antacids, antipsychotics and many others, as I've read that the Patients Association are looking into what might be causing antibiotic resistance from these drugs as well as antibiotics. No more has been said on their web site as yet.

    Is it possible that we are all in a 'holding bay' until Technology can determine Real Scientific answers?

    When I attended the pain clinic, it was very much about the brain sending false messages to the nerves, which were hyperactive after an injury had healed. I was told the immune system acts the same way. It was explained that when an injury occurred the main nerve leading to the brain, in some people, opened more 'gates' which allowed more chemicals from the injury through these gates to go to the brain. This caused the brain to think the damage was still there. The example given was an amputee, who lost a leg, often felt as if the leg was still there and still felt pain from it. Also the main nerve would put out small nerves at the same time. When asked why they said they didn't know the answer yet.

    My theory is likened to a small lizard who ejects his tail if a predator catches him by it. He then grows a new tail. It is a safety measure to protect the lizard. If our main nerve is damaged we cannot grow a second main nerve but, if it puts out small hypersensitive nerves that grow to skin level, are they our form of protection by warning of the danger of harm if we carry on doing what we did wrong in the first place?

    Perhaps simplistic, but an idea that seems to me to be just as applicable as the other hypothesis. Brain training does not stop neuropathic pain, but taking more and stronger pain modifiers is very risky and can lead to addiction. Stress relief, rest and good sleep helps. It still does not cure pain. We simply don't know how to safely stop it yet.

    Sorry this is long and brings a few themes together. I'd welcome some views around all this. I am not dismissing what the BPS model has done and is still doing. I especially object to deceit, lies, blaming patients, neglect and demonisation with consequences far beyond that of what this method is doing and has done to sufferers.
     
    Squeezy, MEMarge and Allele like this.
  6. Inara

    Inara Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,734
    So, is there some sort of summary which can be done, should be done and will be done? Something we can do?
     
    Skycloud and Allele like this.
  7. ME3

    ME3 Established Member

    Messages:
    14
    I think the only way I can summarise is to say the UK are adopting the US style health service. I'm not fully aware of what that involves but don't like the sound of health insurance at all. I know that clinics providing multidisciplinary treatments are becoming established and the strong push on MH is part of that process. Mainly psychological and GET. Encouragement to take care of ourselves with new proposals for Personal Health care funding announced today(voted down last time). Only 350,000 people were mentioned for this. What about the rest? More chronic diseases than this if including all the MUS patients.

    We are being taken right back to basics with the 'Holding Bay' idea until research can provide answers. People often want drugs to cure them and don't realise the dangerous side effects. Pharmaceutical companies pushing/funding trials and influencing doctors to over prescribe has been recognised and may be something to draw to public attention? Health Insurance stepping in to offer their services, often with promotions that increase in cost down the line and 'assessors' deciding what to call the condition. May be highlighting the fact that this leads to patients being sent round in circles, spending thousand on drugs, that are not good for what ever patient has.

    Vital to have correct diagnosis first. The link between pharmas and Health Insurance companies is wrong.

    The message here is to stop this continuing to happen in the NHS. At the moment we have the usual confused messages coming out of UK.

    It seems that we may be trying to help those who can manage life better with CBT and GET will be able to do that.

    Are they trying to sort those from distinct disease patients in a neuro developmental bracket?

    ME/CFS will definitely not be helped with these clinics and our right to refuse GET or CBT should not be used against us. What worries me is that patients of working age may be forced to these clinics, without having a correct diagnosis, being labelled with MUS, MH and if refusing CBT/GET could face sanctions if they don't attend and forced into work etc. Pretty much the same as we have with DWP now.

    We need clarity on what ME patients are going to face in the future. Correct diagnosis (J Newton discussed 40plus% of patients sent to her did not have ME/CFS).

    We need to stop the negative media. Good articles and voices from MEA stories lately. My suggestion from this Put the MYTHS to bed NOT the Patients?

    Why are we having neuroscientists(neuroscience, health and behaviour) involved with ME? We need Neurologists?

    It is so complicated this is all I can manage at the moment. Probably enough to read. and consider.
     
    Inara, MEMarge and Allele like this.
  8. ME3

    ME3 Established Member

    Messages:
    14
    Just one more issue. Health care is being removed from the hands of doctors and placed into IAPTS in conjunction with new recording systems, gathering our health information for sharing with the IAPTS and outsourced private companies. I don't have the links in previous conversations on this forum.

    Doctors have not been allowed to make the decisions for referals, without sending on to a panel for their judgement. This has been happening for a number of years already.
     
    Inara, MEMarge and Allele like this.
  9. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,261
  10. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,261
    adambeyoncelowe, Inara and Aimossy like this.
  11. Inara

    Inara Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,734
    Thank you @Amw66 for the link.

    There is a dire need to go against MUS, or am I over-exaggerating?
     
    MEMarge likes this.
  12. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,261
    I think Sharpe is drawing a twitter storm as a diversionary tactic - this is preserving and extending his infratsructure
     
    MEMarge and Inara like this.
  13. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,047
    Location:
    UK
    I have a question about the code or codes that are put on patients' records when they are diagnosed with one or more of the various things that are, underneath it all, considered to be MUS e.g. Bodily Distress Disorder or Somatic Symptom Disorder or Medically Unexplained Symptoms or any of the other names that are used.

    If I asked my GP if any of these codes had been put on my records what is the likely reaction going to be?

    1) The GP will record that I'm paranoid.

    2) She will tell me the truth because she is obliged to.

    3) She will lie because she is allowed to lie to patients.

    4) She might tell me the truth even though she doesn't have to.

    5) Something else I haven't thought of.

    I copied this from one of @Dx Revision Watch 's posts in the other place :

     
  14. Snowdrop

    Snowdrop Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,134
    Location:
    Canada
  15. Inara

    Inara Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,734
    Now they justify sexism and racism with "studies". (I cannot find a good reason why women, younger persons and non-native speakers more often have "MUS" - unless of course that's the group of persons where the fewest diagnostics are performed per se due to prejudice.) 2/3 practically says "nearly all their symptoms are in their head". If that's a doctor's takeaway of articles like that - nice!

    That has a "Beigeschmäckle" (a certain taste)...

    And again...
    If such findings were trully correct one would have to accept them. But since psychologists are well-known for their excellent scientific standards...it's hard for me to believe these statements are true.
    Oh, it gets better:

    Now it gets puzzling, having the last sentences in mind:
    By the way, many articles by Wessely, Fink, Chalder, Dreary, Sharpe etc. are cited which might indicate they were working on this model before/during PACE.

    I still ask myself what can I/we practically do?
     
    jeckylberry, Hutan, andypants and 3 others like this.
  16. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,574
    Location:
    UK
  17. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,047
    Location:
    UK
    @Sly Saint In your link there is a reference to this :

    https://www.researchgate.net/public...ients_diagnosed_with_bodily_distress_syndrome

    Title : Is physical disease missed in patients with medically unexplained symptoms? A long-term follow-up of 120 patients diagnosed with bodily distress syndrome

    Median follow-up time was 3.7 years.

    But this is useless. It will miss loads of women with gynaecological conditions. Just as an example, the average time to diagnosis for endometriosis is currently 7 years - MUS is going to make that become open-ended and much, much longer because doctors appear to want to make endometriosis an MUS too. So time to diagnosis will theoretically become infinite i.e. it will never be diagnosed. The same problems will arise with fibroids, ovarian cancer could become much less likely to be found at all until its too late, adenomyosis - forget it - it will vanish as a disease and become imaginary, ovarian cysts causing pain - forget those too. All gynae conditions are in danger of becoming MUS.

    I was startled to discover that the modern treatment of ovarian cysts (even big ones) is often to leave them alone and let them burst. The scarring and adhesions and lifetime of pain that must result from this doesn't bear thinking about.
     
  18. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,047
    Location:
    UK
    It gets hinted at here : https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/ovarian-cyst/treatment/

    The policy of "watchful waiting" goes on for years in many cases.

    But I have to admit my evidence is mainly anecdotal from forums where there are lots of women.
     
    Inara, ladycatlover and Lisa108 like this.
  19. Inara

    Inara Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,734
    Of course no disease will be missed! How can you miss a disease if you don't even look for it as is counseled by MUS guidelines? Because, diagnostic tests cause iatrogenic harm. Grrr :mad:
     
    Arnie Pye likes this.
  20. Inara

    Inara Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,734
    Well, returning to the middle ages...

    So sad. So shocking.
     
    Arnie Pye likes this.

Share This Page