The European Association of Psychosomatic Medicine (EAPM)

strategist said:
A pathetic collection of make-believe articles whose only purpose is to ensure employment for incompetents that couldn't make it in real medicine.
Click to expand...
-I think it's important not to tar all with the same brush.
-In perusing the titles I found some that I thought looked like important, practical research into some serious problem.
-A lot have reasonable lines of inquiry but are muddled by babble.
-Unfortunately many do seem to be either pure theoretical babble or the kind of thing that would lead to oblique blaming of and imposition of psychological interventions upon people who are suffering from serious medical problems.

Maybe we need #NotAllPsychs ;)
 
Autobiographical memories of physical activity were ruminated on more by both CFS/ME and asthma groups. In the case of the CFS/ME group, more general memories were associated with greater behavioral disengagement; encouraging greater specificity of autobiographical memorie s may be clinically beneficial.
Click to expand...

The author thinks that getting patients to recall different things may lead to a clinical benefit. I am now doubting the author's sanity.

Whereas awareness of sensations differentiates between patients and healthy controls, awareness of symptoms differs between patient groups. The results may help to further disentangle adaptive and maladaptive aspects of interoceptive awareness
Click to expand...

They seem to have discovered that patients have symptoms, unlike healthy people. I doubt that these results will advance our knowledge.

70% of adolescent OD patients were improved in 2 years after psychosomatic interventions regardless of OD duration, transition, and comorbidities. Family interventions may be an useful treatment for adolescent OD.
Click to expand...

OD = orthostatic dysregulation. Apparently the name used in Japan for orthostatic intollerance (they mention CFS). With a lack of a control group the study isn't telling us anything about treatment so stop trying to suggest it does.

As measured by the questionnaires BDI II and ICD Symptom Rating (ISR), 72% reported complete or partial remission, 28% no change. 52% persons unfit for work went back to work supported by socio-professional reintegration programs of 3-5 weeks length, 21% began work directly after rehab, for 17% medical leave was continued, 10% retired with an employment disability pension. Psychosomatic rehab is an effective treatment to prevent early retirement due to employment
disability and offers new experiences for a self-reliant life and for a return to work
Click to expand...

No control group, and no long term data. For all we know the patients (some of which had a CFS diagnosis) who went back to work collapsed shortly afterwards. The conclusion is not justified.

Generally, cases differed from non-cases, and there was a strong association between positive case status and reporting a poor self-perceived health (p<0.001). Cases were more prone to be females, having less education, consuming less alcohol, eating unhealthily, being a previous or current smoker, and having a more sedentary lifestyle (p<0.05). As for mental parameters, cases
had a higher score on all measurements (p<0.001). Besides systolic blood pressure, the majority of cases differed from non-cases regarding physical parameters (p<0.005), having higher BMI, less exercise capacity and lower handgrip strength. Differences between the various syndromes will be further explored.
Click to expand...

From the Per Fink group, about bodily distress disorder. They're not making any weird conclusions here, that seems to be planned for future studies. We are not really learning anything new here though. It's what you would expect to find in chronically ill people.
 
Last edited:
I just noticed the National Center of Excellence for CFS/ME in Norway have added this conference in their overview of seminars/conferences/meetings about ME.

The upcoming ME-symposium at Stanford University is missing on their list. :banghead:

They do however link to a coming seminar in Oslo for health personell about ME arranged by themselves and with themes as hypnosis and the biopsychosocial model.

(there is an ongoing petition against this center. Thread here)
 
Merged thread

Michael Sharpe about Paul Garner at the European Association of Psychosomatic Medicine (EAPM), 2021 3rd June

18 May 2021
Prof. Sharpe, Vice-president of EAPM, introduces Prof. Garner, keynote lecturer at the EAPM Virtual Conference 2021: Thu, June 3rd, 2021 at 15.45 CEST.



(comments appear to be on)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How utterly ridiculous for a supposedly serious medical conference to make so much of one patient's version of their recovery.

Ah, but I forget, these psychosomatic medicine psychiatrists aren't interested in valid research, only in propping up their own careers.

Eminence based medicine.

Bah humbug.
 
Continuing to turn science on its head.

What do they tell their students? That research conclusions involving just one subject are valid to base entire treatment policies on? What kind of grade would they give such a paper?

Would these people drive a new vehicle model if it had never been tested? What about new medication? If it had never been through trials would they take it anyways? If this were safe and acceptable, pharmaceutical companies wouldn't need to spend billions testing new drugs. Just put them out there.

They likely rely on science in other areas, and probably assume that proper research has been done. Lives literally depend on good science. And yet some in psychology and psychiatry seem to get a pass on these requirements.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom