The Conversation: Success in treating persistent pain now offers hope for those with Long COVID

Not a recommendation, with a giveaway being the use of "CFS/ME"

https://theconversation.com/success...-offers-hope-for-those-with-long-covid-232897

---

Hamish Wilson
Associate Professor in General Practice, University of Otago

John Douglas Dunbar
Clinical Senior Lecturer in Surgical Science, University of Otago

Referencing the Oslo Consortium: Chronic fatigue syndromes: real illnesses that people can recover from (2023, Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care)

 

Ah yes, Hamish Wilson, he heads the Mel Abbott The Switch Fan Club at Otago Med School

 

It's interesting that the Conversation isn't allowing comments on this article. Some have left critical comments on the associated Facebook post instead:

 

I have read this article multiple times now and have finally realised why something felt “off” about it, aside from the theme. I have a nagging feeling that the article was not entirely the work of the authors. It is too slick and specific to the BPS (Oslo consortium) dogma, with links to papers that would be obscure to anyone outside of that clique. It lacks any specific context to NZ or links to any local studies.

Is it possible that the Oslo consortium spin doctors wrote this with the intention of Wilson & Dunbar putting their names to it? Or at least spoon-fed them the key points and links?

It would be interesting to compare and contrast with other recent or future articles on this theme in other parts of the world.

 

I read the little bit of text at the top of that Facebook post (I don't have a Twitter account so can read very little on there these days.)

There is an assumption, both in medicine and society in general, that when an injury of any kind has healed that the healed tissue works exactly the same as it did before it was damaged. People accept that external damage might leave scars, but they are assumed to be unimportant once the healing is complete. Internal damage (e.g. adhesions) is usually assumed to not even exist because it can't be seen and doesn't show up in scans.

A common example - any woman who has had gynaecological surgery of any kind is assumed to be fine within a few short weeks of the surgery being over. The fact that adhesions after gynae surgery are "a thing" that changes the way that affected tissue works rarely gets mentioned. For example, a bowel distorted by adhesions might not work as well as it should because it won't move in a normal way, or at all, and causes pain. This often gets labelled "IBS" and used to be "treated" with anti-depressants - never pain relief. I would guess these days that it is "treated" with CBT or nothing and the patient is labelled with a "functional" condition or is labelled as a hypochondriac, drug-seeker, or mentally ill.

 

Well they took care of that by removing the post. Problem solved. No criticism to be found, everyone loves it!

 

They do link to it, so at least it influenced them, but referring to them as "a Scandinavian research group" suggests little familiarity with them besides agreeing with the same nonsense.

 

This stuff should lead to merciless piling on, disqualification even. No serious person should read anything surrounding anything like this with anything but total contempt, it is completely unserious.

But instead this is the future of medicine, unquestioned by most, unopposed by almost all. At least until technology makes this entirely obsolete. Space age cutting edge science for some, yoga, kale smoothies and complete bullshit for the rest.

 

Referencing Efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Targeting Severe Fatigue Following Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial (2023, Clinical Infectious Diseases) which as I recall talked about dysfunctional beliefs, though not specifying them as subconsciously held.

Anyway, an ironic phrase to use in this piece, given the absence of thinking going on here. Subconsciously held beliefs? That's you lot, not the patients.

 

The article is being republished by others. My husband spotted it on RNZ. Argh
ETA: Apparently the Herald has picked it up, too. Depressing

They know exactly who and what they're referring to here. They're not the only ones in NZ citing "Scandinavian researchers" e.g. Arroll who's involved in GP training does the same. And all three of them are known and active promoters of the LP and the Switch (similar concept developed by a former LP practitioner). All three of them like to dress those commercial programmes with a sheen of scientific credibility. They're counting on Kiwis making the assumption that any research coming out of Scandinavia is high quality. I don't know if it's a highly coordinated strategy but there are no coincidences here

ETA: added the word "commercial" for the benefit of new readers who could be misled to think these programmes are mainstream medical therapies, they're not

 

Good News: David Tullers critique of this article https://virology.ws/2024/06/28/trial-by-error-the-conversation-recycles-biopsychosocial-nonsense/

Bad News: The doctors are being interviewed on RNZ Sunday radio programme tomorrow at 11.35. It will be Brian Crump, standing in for Jim Mora. A few of us in the community have started sending emails to sunday@rnz.co.nz & including the link to Dave’s post.