Hi, I know people who have helped some for short period of time.
Problem-o is it may be another way stealing our last few bucks, due to being sooo desperate to get well. Still little info growing immune ILL.
Like that money to check out the link of the mycoplasma & connection to these illnesses, including Parkinsons,ALS, Gulf War, (mention never touched their soil) only got injections for.Lyme & all it`s co-infection has much better outlook for people to get treatment that is suited for them & the co-infections.Now Autism?
These type treatments can be Dangerous/Mentally if not let down can cause serious depression.Guilt carried,huge $$$ loss ++++. High rate suicide with these DD`s
As well know, we all respond diff. to meds. treatment because depends on how severe & how many co-infections.
Like people who come home from Mayo C. Usually depression worse, Pts. I took care of.
It is sad we are all used. Love have the $$$ ON NOT GETTING WELL.
Know what you are choosing???

Karen , Clearwater,

CBT? Ok- It's perfectly reasonable to suggest that we can employ psychological techniques as one part of a strategy to deal with chronic illness.

BUT- in the absence of sustained, well-funded research into the organic basis of the conditions, harping on about CBT comes across to patients as another way of saying..."we think it's primarily a psychological illness."

CBT night help some patients. However, what if you harbour no negative thought patterns and seek constantly to improve things and challenge yourself (sensibly) within the limits imposed by illness?The psychologists did absolutely nothing for me, not because I was close-minded to what they had to say, but because I found what they said utterly useless and inapplicable.

I am recovering now (after 10 horrid years), but only because I figured out what was amiss physiologically and treated it accordingly. Mark Henderson's piece really lacks proper context.

Stephen Phillips, Canberra, Australia

Being refered to an M.E. team brought releif that my illness was finally being recognised (after years of not even having a diagnosis) so the CBT treatment did appear to help with coping with being ill, but I do wonder if this was more about finally getting official recognition of what was wrong with me, and being able to talk (winge) about all my woes, more than the actual 'treatment' made the difference to me. Pacing is my best friend, but still only helps with coping - I continue to get more symptoms. If this is the case, do we need high paid profesionals to diliver a service which could be offered by a sympathetic nurse at the doctors surgery with follow up drop in sessions which would then be ongoing, instead of a few weeks/months then ignored again, and money to spare for research into the physical side of M.E.

Withheld, Bristol,

I have had ME (note, not CFS) for over 25 years and I have found CBT to be next to useless and indeed harmful, a fact that is reported time and time again by patients with ME. I think that this article is highly dubious and biased and based on a "research study" which has recieved NO peer review and has NOT even been published! The author of the "research" is also renowned for being highly biased in favour of CBT and the promotion of her chosen "medical" field.It would be "interesting" to know how this article came about and the links between Mr. Henderson and Trudy Chalder.

James, London,

CBT can help those struggling to cope with long term illness, but the issue with CFS/ME is that it is sold as the main treatment of choice rather than as an occasionally helpful adjunct. Whilst there may be “no other therapies for CFS with such good evidence in their support”, the evidence for CBT is still weak and this speaks volumes about the urgent need for biomedical research to identify other treatments. Most of the controversy really centres on what you casually refer to as a related strategy, Graded Exercise Therapy. Not only weak on evidence it has actually made a great deal of ME/CFS sufferers worse. Finding the biomedical reasons for this should be a priority rather than berating all CFS sufferers for being understandably concerned that they are only being offered ‘coping strategies’ whilst there is no Government biomedical approach to properly understand the pathogenesis of this illness and develop effective treatments that CBT could be used alongside if required.

Ben Morello, Oxford, UK

For an alternative take on the imposition of CBT for M.E. sufferers the following link might prove a very interesting read.


http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/COERCION_AS_CURE.htm

josh, Newcastle, U.K.

CBT can be helpful for those people with CFS who cannot mentally cope with their condition. Various psychotherapies have been shown to help but it does nothing for the illness itself. (Mother of 18 year old who has been ill for 9 years)

Lynn, Stoke on Trent, England

Imagine that people with cancer, type1 diabetes, arthritis and HIV were only offered CBT (and graded exercise)? God forbid!

Yet that is what happens with CFS - or as we patients prefer to say, M.E. It seems the £90 billion per annum NHS is not putting much effort into discovering the root biological cause(s) of a condition which often leaves people with a lower quality of life than those in the above mentioned groups.

So instead of hiding behind CBT, how about some proper reseach being done? This is what is making the patient groups angry.

Paul Cooper, Edinburgh, UK

CBT can help those struggling to cope with long term illness, but the issue with CFS/ME is that it is sold as the main treatment of choice rather than as an occasionally helpful adjunct. Whilst there may be “no other therapies for CFS with such good evidence in their support”, the evidence for CBT is still weak and this speaks volumes about the urgent need for biomedical research to identify other treatments. Most of the controversy really centres on what you casually refer to as a related strategy, Graded Exercise Therapy. Not only weak on evidence, it has actually made a great deal of CFS/ME sufferers worse. Finding the biomedical reasons for this should be a priority rather than berating all CFS sufferers for being understandably concerned that they are only being offered ‘coping strategies’ whilst there has never been a Government biomedical approach to properly understand the pathogenesis of this illness and develop effective treatments that CBT could be used alongside if required

Ben Morello, Oxford, UK

"The origins of CFS remain obscure" because the MRC are not funding any research into the biological causes or physical treatments of CFS.

I think patient groups of Diabetes 1 and Arthritis would react with anger also, if millions of pounds had been spent funding research into CBT and nothing had been spent on researching the physical causes or drug therapies for their patients' illnesses.

As a sufferer of CFS for over 20 years, I would have no objection to CBT if it was offered in addition to a diagnostic test and drug therapies as in diabetes 1 and arthritis.

Withheld, Hertford, UK

I think this is a good and balanced article_ i have had CFS for 4 years, and have really found CBT helpful.

Name Withheld, scotland,