New clinical guidelines for ME/CFS from Alberta, Canada

New Clinical Practice Guidelines for ME/CFS have been produced in Alberta, Canada drawing on the Canadian consensus criteria, IOM guidelines and recent research findings: Identification and symptom management of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)

Quote from p6: In summary, all patients with ME/CFS have post exertional malaise (PEM) which limits the ability to exercise. No study of CBT and/or GET has measured post exertional malaise (PEM). 

Psychiatrist Eleanor Stein MD FRCP(C) gives some background to the guidelines, April 13, 2016:

This CPG was drafted by an expert committee of Towards Optimal Practice (TOP). TOP is a collaboration of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta and the Alberta Medical Association. Toward Optimized Practice (TOP) helps Alberta physicians and the teams with whom they work implement evidence-based practices to enhance the care of their patients

I served as the content expert on the committee. We also had one scientist/researcher, one patient advocate, one psychologist and 3 family physicians on the committee. All the committee members have extensive knowledge of and experience with individuals with ME/CFS. We had access to a professional librarian to access all of the literature needed and a professional guidelines facilitator to draft the guidelines. It was a positive experience with everyone agreeing on the importance of the task and having an understanding of the unmet needs of individuals with ME/CFS. I am very proud of the guidelines.

My hope is that these guidelines will be promoted and used across jurisdictions in Canada and abroad. All family physicians in Alberta were sent an email about these guidelines. Please discuss them with your doctor.

“Identification and symptom management of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)

TOP’s new Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) responds to the need for greater awareness that Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is a complex, chronic, debilitating physical condition that can be identified and successfully managed in the primary care setting.

The CPG aims to equip clinicians with the necessary knowledge and tools to identify and provide symptom management while empowering the patient by acknowledging the legitimacy of the condition and respecting the patient’s lived experience.”

 

Posted in News | Tagged , , | Comments Off on New clinical guidelines for ME/CFS from Alberta, Canada

Patients with CFS have significant measureable sleep problems

Research abstract:

Background:
Sleep disturbance affects almost 95% of people with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). However, existing studies of sleep in CFS have shown mixed results and methodological issues prevent between-study comparisons.

Purpose:
To redress this, the present study aimed to investigate whether there are differences in the sleep of patients with CFS and healthy controls, using a comparative analysis of polysomnography over three consecutive nights.

Methods:
Twenty-two patients with CFS (1994 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria) and 22 healthy controls underwent three nights of polysomnographic sleep assessment. Groups were compared on their objective sleep variables derived from the third night of assessment, to allow for participant adaptation to the sleep study.

Results:
9.1% of patients met criteria for an objectively verifiable sleep disorder. Differences in sleep were observed between CFS patients and healthy controls on four objectively derived sleep variables (wake after sleep onset, sleep efficiency, percentage wake and REM Latency). In addition, people with CFS reported more severe symptoms of insomnia than
healthy controls.

Conclusions:
The study reports on key differences in sleep between people with CFS and healthy individuals. The potential presence of a sleep disorder in this patient population is high, it is therefore important that during early evaluation, a detailed history of sleep is taken to rule out a sleep disorder in CFS. In addition, patients with CFS show poorer sleep as defined by objectively derived measures and also self-report poorer quality sleep.  Improving sleep is a potential treatment target in CFS.

A comparative polysomnography analysis of sleep in healthy controls and patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, by Zoe M. Gotts, Vincent Deary, Julia L. Newton, Jason G. Ellis in Fatigue: Biomedicine, Health & Behavior [Preprint Published online: 13 Apr 2016]

Posted in News | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Patients with CFS have significant measureable sleep problems

What I’m really thinking: the person with ME

Guardian article, by Anonymous, 16 April 2016: What I’m really thinking: the person with ME

It is sometimes called chronic fatigue syndrome, but that’s a bit of a misnomer. I’m not just tired

I have myalgic encephalomyelitis. If you think it is hard to say, try living with it every day.

Yes, I understand that your aunt had chronic fatigue, and that she took some B-vitamins and is all-better now. No, it isn’t adrenal fatigue because that doesn’t exist. Oh yes, how fantastic that your friend’s friend was really tired after a virus, but she tried acupuncture and cut out wheat and dairy from her diet and next week she is running the London marathon.

I don’t have what they probably had, you see, because only 5% of people recover from myalgic encephalomyelitis. It is sometimes called chronic fatigue syndrome, but that’s a bit of a misnomer. I’m not just tired. The paralysis was the first worry. Then all the muscle pain. Then the memory loss. Then losing the ability to speak without stuttering. I started to forget what words meant. Or who my boyfriend was. Then the fatigue came to kick me when I was down. Then the nausea. Then the constant, unrelenting joint pain, headaches, and flu-like symptoms.

Ah yes, I know. You were so tired last weekend, you just fell asleep on the sofa. But were you so tired that you slept solidly for 22 hours and then spent an hour getting from your bedroom to the bathroom and back again before sleeping for another 22 hours? I thought not.

I’ve improved a lot in eight years. But I’ve been told this is as good as it gets. I will never recover unless medicine has a breakthrough. And I have accepted that, so why can’t you? I appreciate your sympathy. Your advice and suggestions are well meant. But please, back off.

• Tell them what you’re really thinking – email mind@theguardian.com

Posted in News | Tagged | Comments Off on What I’m really thinking: the person with ME

A person with ME responds to MS drug Copaxone

A Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/POTS Patient Responds to a Multiple Sclerosis Drug – What Does It Mean? Discussion started by Cort Johnson, Mar 30, 2016 on Health Rising blog:

Before 2002 Rachel owned two businesses, had boundless energy, worked out with a trainer five mornings per week, sat on boards, chaired fundraisers and had a full social calendar and was rarely sick. She was able to keep her only health issue, periodic tachycardia, under control by using the valsalva maneuver.

One would never have thought that this dynamo, a decade later, would be spending 20 hours a day in bed. The idea that a healthy, active person can get knocked down by chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), of course, is nothing new. In its general outlines Rachel’s story is no different from that of many with ME/CFS

There is one important exception – an exception that could give us a clue about ME/CFS – at least her ME/CFS. About 8 years ago she took a drug that caused her fatigue to virtually disappear for about six weeks. It wasn’t ME/CFS drug, though; it was a multiple sclerosis (MS) drug.

The only reason she got the drug was that she had been misdiagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Ironically, she responded much better to the drug than MS patients do. It was as if the drug had been made for her disease – not MS. Unfortunately, she developed an allergic reaction to the drug and had to stop it.

Let’s take a look first at Rachel’s story and then at Copaxone

Rachel’s Story

Rachel’s autonomic nervous system and orthostatic intolerance issues showed up first when she began experiencing dizziness and blurred vision on early morning hikes during warm days.

By 2005 increasing fatigue had caused her to reduce her work week to 3.5 days. Her symptoms were strange and hard to understand; her legs were itchy, she had numbness in her big toes, she blacked out a couple of times after workout and was drinking copious amounts of water.

In 2006 she moved and opened up a new business with her husband but her decline continued. Synthroid reduced her fatigue a bit in 2007 but a cold triggered pins and needles sensations that remained and then a prolonged dizzy spell hit sent her to the doctor.

An MRI showing lesions on her brain left her with a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. A subsequent MRI suggested she did not have MS, but then a third MRI and a spinal tap with an MS specialist indicated that she did have MS. (Spinal lesions only showed up intermittently for Rachel and her spinal fluid showed no oligoclonal bands.)

She started on an immune modulating drug used in MS called Copaxone.

On Copaxone
Rachel’s response to Copaxone confused everyone. Copaxone is supposed to reduce disease progression in MS but in Rachel it did more than that; it seemed to reverse her disease progression. Rachel’s severe fatigue seemed to melt away under Copaxone and she began exercising again. Both she and her husband were astonished at her improvement. Unfortunately about six weeks later after welts appeared on her stomach she was advised to stop the Copaxone.

Her fatigue returned. She was began experiencing unremitting tinnitus, intermittent eye-twitching, copious eye watering as well. In 2012 after upping her dose of Synthroid – which made her feel better – her health worsened.

Off Copaxone

Blood sugar issues came to the fore. A couple of times after skipping meals she became confused and unable to speak. Eating cupcakes sent her into such severe tachycardia (heart rate 220) that an ambulance was called.

More strange symptoms – vision symptoms (“bouncy” eyes, double vision, light sensitivity), muscle spasm in her arms, legs and lower abdomen, anxiety, brain fog and insomnia ensued. Extreme light sensitivity left her unable to look at a computer screen A test indicated that she was taking too much synthroid and she reduced her dose.

In 2013 she realized that she had severe blood sugar problems and changed her diet accordingly. She began to heal a bit and her anxiety and insomnia abated.

In 2014 after spending 3 months on grain, dairy and sugar-free elimination diet plus CoQ10 supplementation – her heart issues were all but gone and her brain fog was much alleviated.

Her fatigue soared, however, when she began taking injected methylated B-vitamins. Her dosage was reduced but the fatigue continued and ultimately, contrary to her doctor’s advice, she stopped taking them.

In 2015 determined to get to the heart of her blood sugar problems she saw an expert in the field who put her on a 72 hour fast. She felt fantastic during the fast but a 4 hour glucose test indicated she had an atypical case of reactive hypoglycemia; her insulin remained steady while her blood sugar dropped.

A New Diagnosis

In May she woke up with the room spinning and it continued to spin for two days. Searching on the internet Rachel realized she might, in fact, have postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS). About ten years after it all began she took a tilt-table test and was diagnosed with POTS/ME/CFS and her MS diagnosis was dropped. (Later her endocrinologist told her many of her reactive hypoglycemia patients also had POTS. )

How sugar is contributing to her orthostatic intolerance isn’t clear but the fact it does is clear. When Rachel cheats and has a cookie the best she can hope for is stomach bloating, an increased heart rate and shallow breathing for up to 2 hours. The worst is what she calls a complete brain shut down.

She always had an organized approach to her health, and over time she has improved. She eats clean organic low-glycemic foods free of gluten, dairy, sugar and other common allergens such as soy. (Her endocrinologist said her diet is “damn near perfect”.) She eats promptly at 9am, 12, 3 and 6pm. Her activity level is roughly the same each day and without exception, she goes to sleep at 10pm to help keep my circadian rhythm in check. She takes the same supplements at the same time each day as well.

Much of the brain fog and the anxiety she began to experience in 2013 is gone but she continues to be debilitated by severe physical and mental fatigue, dizziness, migraines, light headedness when standing, numb toes, confusion, blood sugar problems and vision issues.

She still cannot tolerate the light from her laptop well and her extreme heat sensitivity remains. She has very limited tolerance for stimulus (good or bad) of any kind, including mental and physical exertion.

An avid exerciser pre-ME/CFS she is determined to get some exercise and does brisk walks daily but then spends 20 hours or more a day in bed.

The Copaxone Question

After all this she looks back to the dramatic 6-week renaissance in health she experienced while on Copaxone. Her response – a dramatic increase in energy – was so atypical that her doctors didn’t know what to do with it. They had never seen that in their MS patients.

MS typically progresses stages in which the disease relapses – gets worse – and then remits (gets better). Copaxone reduces the number and severity of MS flares or relapses. In Rachel’s case, however, Copaxone didn’t appear to just slow the progression of her disease – it reversed it. That completely baffled her doctors.

That six-week period remains easily the best period of health she’s had in the past fifteen years.

Like many drugs the mechanism or mechanisms by which Copaxone is somewhat mysterious. In general Copaxone is believed to shift the population of T cells from proinflammatory (Th1) to anti-inflammatory (Th2) cells. It also may act as a decoy which results in the immune system attacking it instead of myelin cells on neurons.

Copaxone’s effects on B-cells are intriguing given Rituximab’s success ME/CFS in several small trials. Both drugs may be having the same general effect – reducing inflammation – but in different ways. Rituximab is believed more effective at changing the composition of the B-cell populations while Copaxone is more effective at altering cytokine production.

One study suggested that Copaxone increased the secretion of IL-10, an anti-inflammatory, by B cells. Given the reduced levels of IL-10 sometimes found in ME/CFS, that’s an intriguing finding. In MS, on the other hand, Rituximab reduces the level of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Copaxone also appears to be able to reduce B-cell migration to the CNS.

The Simmaron ME/CFS spinal fluid study could be instructive. It found that MS and ME/CFS were immune exhaustion disorders but in different ways. Could Copaxone be better suited to ME/CFS than MS?

Simmaron’s Spinal Fluid Study Finds Dramatic Differences in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

In general the evidence suggests that Rachel’s success with Copaxone may have come from its anti-inflammatory properties. If you have an idea why Rachel did so well, or if you’ve tried Copaxone or a similar drug please let us know in the comments section.

The Immunomodulation Question and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)

What do we know about immunomodulatory drugs and ME/CFS? We know that at least some patients have reported dramatic successes with Ampligen, Rituximab and now Copaxone. That, of course, suggests that other immunomodulatory drugs – and there are quite a few of them (Abatacept (Orencia), Adalimumab (Humira), Infliximab (Remicade), Etanercept (Enbrel), IVIG, methotrexate, azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, cyclosporine, and tacrolimus) – might be helpful indeed. Getting access to them, however, is another story.

People diagnosed with autoimmune or autoinflammatory disease may be able to cycle through these drugs them looking for what works but ME/CFS patients don’t have that luxury. Despite Rachel’s dramatic success with Copaxone now that her MS diagnosis has been retracted she is ironically, not eligible for similar drugs.

We need more than anecdotal reports of improvement or recovery, though, to get access to these drugs. We need research results and treatment trials. A strong Rituximab result, would, of course, change the dynamic of this disease significantly. An Ampligen approval would do likewise.

The bigger and better the studies we get the better our chances of getting those kinds of results. It’s perhaps notable that two of our best studies to date; the Lipkin/Hornig blood and the Lipkin/Hornig/Simmaron spinal fluid studies ended up with similar findings.

Over the next year the Nath project at the NIH and Ron Davis’s severely ill study at the Open Medicine Foundation will dig deeper into the pathophysiology of ME/CFS than any studies before them. Both will take parallel paths: both will look wide and deep in the immune and other systems in a smaller number of patients, and then attempt to validate their findings in a larger number of patients.

This is the kind of organized approach to ME/CFS which may ultimately give ME/CFS patients access to immunomodulatory or other therapies that can help.

Posted in News | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on A person with ME responds to MS drug Copaxone

Treatment expectations influence the outcome

Research abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To improve the effectiveness of treatment in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome it is worthwhile studying factors influencing outcomes. The aims of this study were (1) to assess the association of expectancy and credibility on treatment outcomes, and (2) to identify baseline variables associated with treatment expectancy and credibility.

METHODS: 122 patients were included in a randomized controlled trial of whom 60 received cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and 62 multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment (MRT). Expectancy and credibility were measured with the credibility and expectancy questionnaire. Outcomes of treatment, fatigue, and quality of life (QoL), were measured at baseline and post-treatment. Multiple linear regressions were performed to analyse associations.

RESULTS: In explaining fatigue and the physical component of the QoL, the effect of expectancy was significant for MRT, whereas in CBT no such associations were found. The main effect of expectancy on the mental component of QoL was not significant. For credibility, the overall effect on fatigue and the physical component of QoL was not significant. In explaining the mental component of QoL, the interaction between treatment and credibility was significant.

However, the effects within each group were not significant. In the regression model with expectancy as dependent variable, only treatment centre appeared significantly associated. In explaining credibility, treatment centre, treatment allocation and depression contributed significantly.

CONCLUSIONS: For clinical practice it seems important to check the expectations of the patient, since expectations influence the outcome after MRT.

Treatment expectations influence the outcome of multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment in patients with CFS, by Vos-Vromans DC, Huijnen IP, Rijnders LJ, Winkens B, Knottnerus JA, Smeets RJ. in J Psychosom Res. 2016 Apr; 83:40-5. [Epub 2016 Feb 17]

 

 

Posted in News | Tagged , | Comments Off on Treatment expectations influence the outcome

PLOS One journal restates position on data sharing to Prof Coyne

In the standoff over release of the PACE PLOS One trial data, has the journal just blinked? by James Coyne, 7 April 2016

I just received (April 7, 2016) another communication from the Managing Editor of PLOS One reporting  an emerging position on my gaining access to the PACE trial data, promised to be available as a condition for publishing in PLOS One.

The negotiations are not over. But is there a signal that PLOS One is prepared to render meaningless their distinctive commitment to full data availability and sharing?

Any retreat from full and unrestricted availability of data has implications for those of us who work for free as Academic Editors, those of us who submit our manuscripts to PLOS One rather than somewhere else because of its data sharing policy, and even those institutions who been willing to subsidize hefty publication costs because of the distinctive claim that data from published articles will be available to all.

If PLOS One abandons or even waters down its commitment to data sharing, will we abandon PLOS One?

As I’ve stated before, despite being in one of thousands of PLOS One Academic Editors, I have no special insight or influence over the decision-making in this matter. Indeed, the PACE investigators have more insight into what is going on, not only because they are directly involved in the negotiations, but because maybe PLOS One could be granting them an extraordinary latitude in whether they can refuse or bureaucratize what had been my simple request for the data.

The e-mail:

“Dear Jim,

Thank you for the correspondence regarding the article by McCrone et al.

As you know we are actively following up on the request for data from the article. We sought advice from two editorial board members in order to establish what data we would expect the authors to share in the context of the current analysis, and we have followed up with the authors. The authors have raised concerns about the need to protect patient privacy as well as the specifications outlined in the consent obtained at the time of recruitment for the trial; our follow up with the authors is ongoing.

We plan to contact Queen Mary’s University of London to discuss our policy and position in relation to the sharing of data from this study.

I would like to take this opportunity to outline what we can and cannot engage in as part of our follow up as editors.

The policy that applies to the article indicates the following:

Publication is conditional upon the agreement of the authors to make freely available any materials and information described in their publication that may be reasonably requested by others for the purpose of academic, non-commercial research.

Availability of data and materials. PLOS is committed to ensuring the availability of data and materials that underpin any articles published in PLOS journals. PLOS’s ideal is to make all data relevant to a given article and all readily replaceable materials immediately available without restrictions (while not compromising confidentiality in the context of human-subject research).

The policy therefore outlines that data should be shared for the purposes of academic research and without compromising confidentiality in the context of human-subject research. Our goal is for authors to release as much data as possible, however the policy cannot supersede the requirements for ethical/data access oversight that may apply to the use of datasets involving human subjects.

It is not within our remit as editors to judge what the requirements for consent, patient privacy or data de-identification should be, such considerations are handled by institutional committees (such as ethics committees), which are equipped to assess and rule on such matters. In the context of our policy we will follow up on any and all requests for data underlying publications in the journal, but there may be situations where such follow up establishes that access to the data requires a process of evaluation by an ethics committee. If that is the case, our position is that the readers requesting the data should pursue such approval process in the context of a defined research proposal, in the same manner as the researchers who undertook the work described in the article did.”

Commentary

In making this new statement available, I believe the scientific and larger communities have the right to know what is going on and should have the opportunity to comment. We are all stakeholders and although PLOS One does not apparently have a mechanism for soliciting such comments, I think we can be heard and influential.

Here is some preliminary observations concerning the communication from PLOS One –

It’s reassuring that the journal reaffirms its commitment to making all data relevant to the article available, but it’s worrisome that PLOS One is legitimizing previously expressed objections of the PACE investigators.

Namely, sharing the data would be inconsistent with their purported commitment to protecting privacy and to honoring the conditions laid out in obtaining patient consent to participation in the trial.

In a decision last winter, the UK Information Commissioner’s (IC) rejected arguments from the PACE investigators that fears of breaching confidentiality because of the inability to anonymize data precluded making the data available. As we now know, anonymizing can be accomplished with readily available technologies.

The recruitment and consenting materials that I have reviewed do not mention any commitment to restricting access to anonymized data.

Indeed, the Medical Research Council (MRC) funded a sister trial to PACE for which data has already been readily available. I would be curious to know if there are any relevant differences in recruitment and consent materials between the two trials.

Furthermore, in recent arguments for rejection of a request for data from a PhD physicist, the PACE investigators did not even mention anonymizing or any concern for keeping the promises provided in obtaining patient consent as reasons for denying her the data. A letter from Peter White to the Wall Street Journal acknowledged the PACE trial data can be effectively anonymized.

Finally, the PACE investigators have disclosed that they have already shared the data with researchers outside their group.

It’s not clear whether the requirement for review of a request by an ethics committee for data opens new loopholes for withholding the data. I’m concerned about a non sequitur being introduced here: that the application to the committee has to involve a pre-specified research plan.

Where did that requirement come from? The PACE investigators notoriously changed their endpoints from their protocol. This raises curiosity not only about what results would’ve been obtained with the original endpoints, but also about what may be uncovered by more exploratory, even forensic, analyses probing what might have led to the decision and what the PIs might be avoiding.

Having the data from published papers available allows independently checking the basis for the original investigators’ claims. This becomes particularly important – as in the case of the PACE trial – when investigators have conflicts of interest and when the conflicts of interest were not disclosed to the study participants.

However, another widely accepted rationale for data sharing is that clinical trials are expensive and impose considerable burdens on patients who participate in them. The best use of the public funds that supported trials and of the patients’ contribution is to make data available for exploring research questions that were not anticipated, without the added expense and patient burden of conducting a whole new trial. I anticipate some anomalies being uncovered that would best be examined in analyses explicitly labeled and interpreted as exploratory.

It’s a relief that the PLOS One administration seems to be avoiding any endorsement of the kinds of loyalty or character tests that were so pivotal in refusals to release the data to date. The PACE investigators may have turned my request for the data into a matter falling under the freedom of information act and rejected the request because my alleged vexatiousness and impure motives in wanting the data.

I’m sure that many of you are disappointed that after all this time, an email from the Managing Editor of PLOS One did not simply provide simple instructions how I and others could access the PACE trial data.

I had also assumed that my request would yield circumstances by which everyone could access the data. It now appears that anyone wanting to access the data, needs to anticipate long delays and a frustrating and potentially uncertain bureaucratic process.

Am I missing anything in this communication?

We need to keep in mind that we always have the option of demanding a retraction of the PLOS One article if the investigators set unreasonable conditions for independently scrutinizing their dubious claims.

And then there is the much-anticipated final decision on April 22, 2016 concerning Queen Mary University London appeal of an Information Commission decision requiring release of the PACE trial reported in The Lancet.

We don’t share data.’ Why Peter White’s Wall Street Journal letter can be ignored, James Coyne,  26 Mar 2016:

James Coyne explains why he thinks the arguments in Peter White’s letter to the Wall Street Journal can be ignored. He closes with:

Author, historian, and social critic Bertrand Russell (May 18, 1872–February 2, 1970) could offer him some useful
advice:

  • Do not think it worth while to proceed by concealing evidence, for the evidence is sure to come to light.
  • Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for if you do the opinions will suppress you.
  • Be scrupulously truthful, even if the truth is inconvenient, for it is more inconvenient when you try to conceal it.
Posted in News | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on PLOS One journal restates position on data sharing to Prof Coyne

The misrepresentation of ME in nursing

Article abstract:

Re :  Diagnosing and managing chronic fatigue syndrome, by D Roberts in Nursing in Practice 89 (2016)

Every nurse has a duty to speak up about wrong practice, or the potential to do harm, I have grave concerns over the serious errors and the misrepresentation of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) contained in the article “Diagnosing and managing chronic fatigue syndrome”.

Last year I was awarded third place in the BJN Nurse of the Year Award, for my contribution to and advocacy for Severe ME. My article “Supporting people with severe myalgic encephalomyelitis” (Crowhurst 2005) is referenced by NICE. In 2006 I represented people with Severe ME in parliament at the Gibson Inquiry (Hooper 2006). I have conducted a national (Crowhurst 2005) and local survey of Severe ME. (Crowhurst 2007) I am the author of “Severe ME, featuring justice for Karina Hansen” (Crowhurst 2013) and “Severe ME, Notes for Carers“(Crowhurst 2015). I have qualifications in Nursing, Counselling , Education and an MA. I have been caring for my wife, who has Very Severe ME, for well over two decades.

1. Wrong application of CFS to ME
2. Wrong focus on behavioural change
3. Wrong emphasis upon mental health issues
4. Wrong approach- i.e. that people will recover, even the severely affected, with a ‘robust approach’
5. Wrong understanding – i.e. “Once severity is fully understood, the person can progress to re-introduce or increase activities they regard as priorities.”
6. Lack of awareness of the literature on severe ME & failings of PACE & FINE trials

The misrepresentation of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis in nursing, by Greg Crowhurst in Stonebird: the lived experience of severe ME, April 2016

Posted in News | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The misrepresentation of ME in nursing

Problem-Solving Toolkit – to help you access support services

Problem-Solving Toolkit
This toolkit from Cerebra aims to support disabled people and carers, as well as their families and advisers, who are encountering difficulties with the statutory agencies in relation to the provision of health, social care and education support services.

This toolkit aims to unpick these problems and to develop effective strategies for resolving them e.g.

  • Inter-agency disputes
  • No such word as “can’t”
  • The budget is spent
  • The panel/manager says “no”
  • Too difficult to think about
  • Delay
  • “I don’t have authority to”
  • Personalities
  • Highly contested fact dispute

Download the Toolkit

Posted in News | Tagged , | Comments Off on Problem-Solving Toolkit – to help you access support services

PACE trial invalidates the use of CBT & GET in ME/CFS

Article abstract:

The main findings reported in the PACE trial were that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) were moderately effective treatments for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), and fear avoidance beliefs constituted the strongest mediator of both therapies.

These findings have been challenged by patients and, more recently, a number of top scientists, after public health expert Tuller, highlighted methodological problems in the trial.

As a doctor who has been bedridden with severe ME for a long period, I analyzed the PACE trial and its follow-up articles from the perspectives of a doctor and a patient.

During the PACE trial the eligibility criteria, both subjective primary outcomes, and most of the recovery criteria were altered, creating an overlap of the eligibility and recovery criteria; consequently, 13% of patients were considered “recovered,” with respect to 1 or 2 primary outcomes, as soon as they entered the trial.

In addition, 46% of patients reported an increase in ME/CFS symptoms, 31% reported musculoskeletal and 19% reported neurological adverse events. Therefore the proportion negatively affected by CBT and GET would be between 46% and 96%, most likely estimated at 74%, as shown in a large survey recently conducted by the ME Association.

Medication with such high rates of adverse events would be withdrawn with immediate effect. There was no difference in long-term outcomes between adaptive pacing therapy, CBT, GET and specialist medical care, and none of them were effective, invalidating the biopsychosocial model and use of CBT and GET for ME/CFS.

The discovery that an increase in exercise tolerance did not lead to an increase in fitness means that an underlying physical problem prevented this; validates that ME/CFS is a physical disease and that none of the treatments studied addressed this issue.

The PACE Trial Invalidates the Use of Cognitive Behavioral and Graded Exercise Therapy in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Review, by Mark Vink
Family Physician, Soerabaja Research Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in Journal of Neurology and Neurobiology 2(3), 30 March 2016

 

Posted in News | Tagged , | Comments Off on PACE trial invalidates the use of CBT & GET in ME/CFS

A list of ME abnormalities & research citations

Paradigm change blog article, 4 April 2016: ME medical abnormalities

More than 500 peer-reviewed articles have been published demonstrating a wide variety of physiological abnormalities in patients with “Chronic Fatigue Syndrome” (a broader condition that currently encompasses patients with the more specifically defined condition of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis).

A PDF summary includes citations and brief summaries of each of these articles, organized by type of abnormality and last updated on 04.4.2016.

Topics include:

  • Overview
  • Cancer Risk
  • Cardiac Abnormalities
  • Orthostatic Intolerance
  • Tilt Table Test
  • Other Cardiovascular Issues
  • Exercise & Activity Intolerance
  • Oxidative Stress & Inflammation
  • Cytokines & Complement
  • Rnase L
  • Mitochondria
  • Natural Killer Cells
  • Other Immune Abnormalities
  • Herpesviruses
  • Enteroviruses
  • Gut
  • Candida
  • Mycoplasma
  • Parvovirus B19
  • Coxiella Burnetii
  • Borna Disease
  • Stealth Virus
  • Other Infections
  • Endocrine System
  • Brain Abnormalities
  • Cognitive Impairment
  • Gait Abnormalities
  • Sleep Abnormalities
  • Pain
  • Muscles
  • Physical Symptoms
  • Physical Abnormalities
  • Laboratory Abnormalities
  • Channelopathies
  • Lipids
  • Carnitine
  • Nutrients
  • Comparison with Other Conditions
  • HLA
  • Genetics

Unfortunately, most of these abnormalities have never been covered by the mainstream news media, meaning that most people (including non-specialist physicians) have no idea that they have been shown to exist.

In addition to the medical literature review, a document listing a few news media articles on this topic that have been run also is available.

Medical Abnormalities Literature Citations

Medical Abnormalities Media Coverage

Posted in News | Tagged , , | Comments Off on A list of ME abnormalities & research citations