first published in 2009. Would be interesting to know what these chapters contain. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books...f00ce-a1ee-4394-a0b9-140cd9b6e785&context=ubx
What on earth? Prof Malcolm Hooper and Dr Byron Hyde are long-established, well known biomedical, not psychiatric, ME researchers and advocates. See, eg, ME-Pedia: https://me-pedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Hooper , https://me-pedia.org/wiki/Byron_Hyde . What the heck are they doing in a psychiatry book? Have they been taken out of context or something? This makes no sense.
I had a brief scan of chapter 51 on lunch yesterday, and at first glance it's not as bad as that synopsis makes out. The writer makes a clear distinction about their beliefs (that ME is a neurological condition, backed by MRI scanning) and that other views are outdated or misconceptions. The rest of the chapter seems to feed into how to psychologically support the ME patient. At a glance, it looks like the following pages cover support/treatment for patients' feelings of loss of identity, change of life path etc. It illustrates it in a case-study style, focusing on the typical patient on their journey from pre-diagnosis, through their difficulties getting a diagnosis, and then into that post-diagnosis scenario where they start to come to terms with the life-long impacts. So it seems like advice for treating the psychological impact of ME, grounded in a belief that it is a biomedical problem that has significant psychological impact as the physical symptoms set in. Some of the writing is a bit glib and some a bit frank, I'm not sure everyone would enjoy it. But it's not BPS. I've got the book on loan and will write up further thoughts after my interview today.
Eventually got around to reading these chapters. Chapter 49 serves as something of a preamble to the forthcoming chapters, detailing the history of "unexplained illnesses" and debating the issues with the terminology, over time. The writer highlights that these terms were used historically for other now-well-established biomedical conditions before we advanced our understanding, including conditions like diabetes. It highlights a common symptom map of ME against other autoimmune and/or neurological conditions to illustrate an overlap that would be easier ascribed to a similar biomedical cause than "simple" somatisation. Chapter 51 then goes on to expand on ME specifically, as per my post above. Having read the rest more thoroughly now, it not only covers the difficulties a typical patient might encounter in their own journey, but also that of medical professionals who are under-resourced to conduct proper investigations (such as in the UK) or who might assume that a referral has been made to them (as a psychiatrist) because all physical investigations have been exhausted at point of consultation, and therefore already being guided down the wrong path. It cautions against this assumption, and advises to work to understand the patient journey first. Again, it illustrates this through the lens of ME as a biomedical problem that could have psychiatric needs as a result of the conditions' impact but treats the two things separately. Both chapters explore some of the social issues that may have also led to the assumptions that have been or are now made about the conditions they are written about. It's not as bad as the synopses made out to be honest. Nothing hugely jumps out at me that I wouldn't put down to the age of the book or the fact that it's a medical textbook and has the quirks and foibles you sometimes find in their ilk.
