Snippets from White P et al. "Eight major errors in the review process and interpretation of the evidence in the NICE guideline [...]" [for ME/CFS]

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic news - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Pustekuchen, Dec 13, 2022.

  1. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    8,093
    Location:
    Australia
    PEM is the core feature, and it is objectively measurable (2 day test protocol).

    Control freaks, inserting themselves into patients' lives for no good reason at all, just trying to hang onto their illegitimate empires and incomes.

    This. Pacing is a management tool, not a therapy. It is used entirely because we don't have any effective therapies. And the one group of people who cannot be blamed for that is patients.

    Indeed.

    Furthermore, not only did 'passive' approaches of APT & SMC manage to equal the results for the 'active' approaches of CBT & GET at the 2.5 year long-term follow-up, the slopes of the results at that time point suggest that SMC & APT results will continue improving (albeit modestly), while those for CBT & GET appear to have the form of natural decay curves (regression to the mean) and have flatlined.

    You are more polite than I.

    'These are our therapies. If you don't like them we have others.'
     
    Dolphin, Sid, Woolie and 14 others like this.
  2. cassava7

    cassava7 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,051
    Breakdown of authors by specialty and area of research. Only academic affiliations are given, except for clinicians who do not have one.

    11 countries are represented. Below is the tally by country.

    1. UK: 28
    2. USA: 7
    3. AU: 3
    4. CA, DE, NL, NO: 2
    5. CZ, DK, FR, IT: 1

    Psychiatrists & psychologists specializing in psychosomatic medicine and/or MUS

    Susan Abbey (University of Toronto, CA)
    Daniel J Clauw (University of Michigan, USA)
    Anthony David (University College London, UK)
    Per Fink (Aarhus University, DK)
    Peter Henningsen (Technical University of Munich, DE)
    Hans Knoop (University of Amsterdam, NL)
    Kurt Kroenke (Indiana University, USA)
    Mujtaba Husain (South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    James L Levenson (University of Virginia, USA)
    Winfried Rief (University of Marburg, DE)
    Alastair Santhouse (South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    Michael Sharpe (University of Oxford, UK)
    Simon Wessely (King’s College London, UK)
    Peter White (Queen Mary University of London, UK)
    Donna E Stewart (University of Toronto & McGill University, CA)
    Vegard Wyller (University of Oslo, NO)

    Neurologists / neuropsychiatrists specializing in FND

    Harriet A Ball (University of Bristol, UK)
    Christine Burness (The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    Alan Carson (University of Edinburgh, UK)
    Jan A Coebergh (St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    Barbara A Dworetzky (Brigham and Women’s Hospital, USA)
    Mark J Edwards (King’s College London, UK)
    Alberto J Espay (University of Cincinnati, USA)
    Béatrice Garcin (Avicenne AP-HP Hospital, FR)
    Ingrid Hoeritzauer (University of Edinburgh, UK)
    Anne Catherine ML Huys (formerly University College London, UK; current affiliation unknown)
    Alexander Lehn (Brisbane Clinical Neuroscience Centre, AU)
    David L Perez (Massachusetts General Hospital, USA)
    Wendy Phillips (Cambridge University Hospitals & Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    Markus Reuber (University of Sheffield, UK)
    Tereza Serranova (Charles University in Prague, CZ)
    Biba Stanton (King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    Jon Stone (University of Edinburgh, UK)
    Michele Tinazzi (University of Verona, IT)
    Adam Zeman (University of Exeter, UK)

    Other

    Epidemiology & public health

    Dedra Buchwald (Washington State University, USA)
    Signe Flottorp (Norwegian Institute of Public Health & University of Oslo, NO)
    Paul Garner (University of Liverpool, UK)
    Paul Glasziou (Bond University, AU)

    Infectious diseases

    Brian Angus (University of Oxford, UK)
    Andrew Lloyd (University of New South Wales, AU)
    Alastair Miller (North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK)
    Maurice Murphy (formerly Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; current affiliation unknown)

    Internal medicine: Jos WM van der Meer (Radboud University, NL)

    Occupational medicine: Ira Madan (King’s College London, UK)

    Primary care

    William Hamilton (University of Exeter, UK)
    Paul Little (University of Southampton, UK)
    Irwin Nazareth (University College London, UK)

    Rehabilitation medicine

    John Etherington (Pure Sports Medicine, UK)
    Derick T Wade (Oxford Brookes University, UK)
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2022
  3. cassava7

    cassava7 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,051
    PACE trial investigators

    Brian Angus
    Trudie Chalder
    Maurice Murphy
    Michael Sharpe
    Peter White

    COFFI committee members

    Dedra Buchwald
    Trudie Chalder
    Daniel J Clauw
    Paul Garner
    Andrew Lloyd
    Jos WM van der Meer
    Simon Wessely
    Vegard Wyller
     
    Dolphin, Woolie, Louie41 and 15 others like this.
  4. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    8,093
    Location:
    Australia
    I guess at least we have all the main psychosomatic players on one self-identified list.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2022
    Dolphin, Sid, MEMarge and 19 others like this.
  5. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    15,192
    Location:
    London, UK
    If I was Guyatt I think I might have tactically kept a distance having been used as an 'independent opinion' over the exercise review. If Guyatt was on this the whole thing would look even more ridiculous.

    I am interested that Wessely is now happy to 'come out' (or reappear) as a co-member of a flat earth society with Henningsen, Wyller, Lightning Flottorp and Garner.

    I wonder if the author of that 'there is a way' email is on this list?
     
    MEMarge, Woolie, Louie41 and 24 others like this.
  6. cassava7

    cassava7 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,051
    The author of the email is said to be Wessely, judging by the typos in his texts that matched those in his tweets.
     
    Dolphin, Louie41, Binkie4 and 12 others like this.
  7. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    23,052
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Thanks for that cassava. In my opinion the number of authors from the FND world show clearly that the concern that we have had about FND is more than merited.
     
    Dolphin, bobbler, MEMarge and 28 others like this.
  8. Solstice

    Solstice Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,218
    I'm "missing" some from the Netherlands, but a lot of them are there yeah.
     
    Dolphin, Louie41, Sean and 4 others like this.
  9. adambeyoncelowe

    adambeyoncelowe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,736
    NICE recently told me that they are incredibly proud of the guideline and think they did it right. They are also working on implementation and raising awareness of the GL, so I can't see them backtracking on it.

    All these arguments are recycled ones that we've responded to at length. They never actually engage with rebuttals in good faith, so I think we have to ignore them for now.

    E.g., they complain about energy management but equally had unevidenced activity management in CG53.

    They complain about a new definition of ME (not true), when CG53 made up its own and said diagnosis should be reconsidered without PEM.

    They admit patients should be listened to, but won't even budge on using their preferred terminology at all times (CFS/ME rather than ME/CFS), which seems overtly "ideological" (and frankly, petty) to me.

    And their own quotes about GET show that the increments of activity are supposed to be MAINTAINED for a whole week at a time (by which point the harm is done), as a minimum, and that you are then supposed to INCREASE the activity again, not reduce it.

    The protocol reveals that "negotiating" activity downward requires permission from a clinician, but the protocol also doesn't accept that worsening is actually harm.

    That is not what symptom-contingent means, by any stretch of the imagination!
     
    Dolphin, MEMarge, Woolie and 35 others like this.
  10. Charles B.

    Charles B. Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    247
    I hope the Open Medicine Foundation, which has a recognized foothold at Mass General, systematically eviscerates these arguments. It’s an august institution, and it would be shameful if Perez appeared to be the representative voice emanating from there. As I believe I intimated earlier, I don’t know that I’ve ever heard his name mentioned in conjunction with ME. Part of me wants to call his clinic and ask if he would even assume command of my care as I have ME and noticed his interest in the disease.
     
    Dolphin, EzzieD, bobbler and 10 others like this.
  11. cassava7

    cassava7 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,051
    In my view, White reached out to Stone and Carson, both of whom are editors of the JNNP and leaders of the FND movement, so that he could publish his manifesto there, and in turn Stone and Carson reached out to other FND influencers (possibly via a mailing list).

    I am not sure that there is excessive cause for concern about the FND movement - more than there would be for MUS - but it does seem like it could become the prevalent interpretation of ME/CFS in neurology.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2022
    Dolphin, Woolie, Louie41 and 11 others like this.
  12. InitialConditions

    InitialConditions Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    North-West England
    There's also the European ME Coalition, who are part of the World ME Alliance. https://europeanmecoalition.com/about/

    It's all a bit confusing, isn't it.

    But we have to get people together, internationally. Everything is too disjointed.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2022
    MEMarge, Louie41, Sean and 6 others like this.
  13. James

    James Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    90
    Judith Rosmalen, G Bleijenberg
     
    Dolphin, Louie41, Sean and 5 others like this.
  14. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,816
    Up until recently but I’ve heard it may have changed, only one group per country could be a member of the European ME Alliance. So I think that is one reason why a second alliance was set up.
     
    Louie41, Sean, Joh and 2 others like this.
  15. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,690
    Location:
    Canada
    I'd put the general issue of EBM and the BPS model as of equal weight, as evidenced by people with little stakes in the matter like Flottorp and Glasziou (and Garner, to a point, I'd say to him this is all about Cochrane). As they say, it strongly overlaps with the chronic pain guidelines, because this is all fully generic, it's not just about us.

    This goes to the crisis of replicability, the billions invested in the BPS model and its general uselessness everywhere it's been tried. It's no coincidence that the rise of the BPS model is happening alongside a rapid rise in mental illness, whether actual or, far more likely, BPS-inspired mass misdiagnosis. It's just that for most patients, medicine has something to offer, so this isn't a major threat, it's treated as adjunct instead of central to their treatment.

    But the general issue remains the complete failure of the biopsychosocial ideology and how central the evidence-based medicine paradigm has been to producing what is by now very obviously flawed pseudoscience masquerading as legitimate. No system that greenlights nonsense can be treated as credible. No system is perfect, but no functioning system produces nonsense like this, certainly not on a grand scale.

    We are the biggest challenge to this paradigm, nothing has been clearly overturned yet. We are the only ones effectively pushing back at this. Not because we are effective at it, because no one else seems open to challenging it head-on. I'd say the main reason for this is that with so few medical professionals backing us who risk reputation suicide for going after the dogma, we can challenge openly without making the few physicians who help us back away, as they already made a choice that made them fringe, if not pariahs. MDs in general are not open to this, so any community where physicians are prominent will back off from this challenge, no matter the threat it represents.

    One notable thing, though it won't make any difference, is the long-standing insistence that this is not a medical issue, that it should be treated differently than normal medicine, but the vast majority of the names are MDs, the exceptions are Chalder and the generic EBM folks. Not many psychologists there, those are medical professionals making medical affirmations about medical issues. Can't really insist it's not a medical entity given that. Bah, it's not like anything matters here.
     
    Woolie, Louie41, bobbler and 5 others like this.
  16. Joan Crawford

    Joan Crawford Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Warton, Carnforth, Lancs, UK
    Spoke with colleagues today. This letter does not, I suspect, come from within an organisation like the Royal College of Psychiatry or similar.

    It is lead by a retired psychiatrist who has had his nose put out of joint. Sour grapes. Along with quite a few other retired people who's reputations have perhaps taken a knock.
     
    MEMarge, Woolie, Louie41 and 21 others like this.
  17. JemPD

    JemPD Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,502
    it already is, has been for several yrs now if my experience of various (very kind & sympathetic but totally sold on the FND thing) neurologists, over the last 8/9yrs
     
  18. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,434
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    There did seem to be a lot of pushback on the NICE Chronic primary pain guideline, including from clinicians. Is there any way that we could combine forces with those interested in getting that guideline reviewed? For those with connections in NICE, do you get the feeling that there would be people within NICE who might welcome pressure to review and improve that guideline, which is surely causing a lot of harm?

    The best form of defence is attack, and all that.
     
  19. Solstice

    Solstice Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,218
    And a certain H Knoop, but those are the big ones yeah.
     
    Sean and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  20. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,434
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    Knoop is there.
     
    Dolphin, bobbler, Solstice and 5 others like this.

Share This Page