Re: False attributions, and the right to comment.

[Guest guest]

annette barclay wrote:

>

> Thanks ,

For bringing up the Royal Free ME outbreak. A few months ago I met

one of the survivors. She was a young doctor at the hospital and

still has ME.

>

> She mentioned that she had been fit and strong when the outbreak

occured. They had many ill and vulnerable patients but she was hit

worse than they were.

> Annette

Wow. Neat!

It's amazing that theorizers have tried so hard to impress the

concept of " burnout " and " rundown " upon a situation in which the

actual people who were hit hardest is in direct opposition to the

theory.

Of course, Dr Cheney and Dr described this again and

again, but it didn't seem to make an impression on those who simply

proceed to fabricate their concepts without regard to the facts.

Do you think she'd be willing to contact me?

I think it would be interesting for survivors of the originating

cohorts for ME and CFS to converse directly without the conceptual

problems of doctors intervening.

-

[Guest guest]

>

> > This argument started because I was willing to stand up on

behalf

> of the many silent members of this list who DO recognize that

there

> was a stress component in the progress of their disease. Rich has

> said that he has heard off-line from many of us. I had the

audacity

> to say out loud that silencing us and demeaning or denying our

> experience was both bad science, and harmful to the purposes of

this

> list -- and yet it happens, every time one of us dares to speak

up.

> It is wrong. I asked for it to stop.

******************the problem in a nutshell with you is you do

not understand the basics of the brain being the main power. You can

only think of what happened to you and cannot get passed that.Stress

is a word but in real terms it means so much more than you cannot

get to understand in your tunnel vision world. If you would open

your perimeters you would see that there is so much more to the

human being. But of course you will never never never never never

never never never never will.****************************

> >

>

> Yes, I know that many feel that stress is a major contributor

to

> their illness, but Rich has said many times that he believes CFS

is

> from a combination of " stress and stressors " so I stood up on

behalf

> of all of us who caught " Yuppie Flu " - " the flu from Hell " which

> didn't care about anyones emotional state.

> Those of us who perceive CFS in that way would like treatment for

a

> physiological illness and let the mental state take care of

itself -

> preferably by reduction of inflammatory cytokines as infection

> subsides.

>

> When it comes to presenting " CFS " , I thought it should be clear

> that we have no precedent or knowledge of any kind of emotional

> state that can result in this specific illness, even as a partial

> contributor.

> After all these years of having this illness dismissed as AIYH,

and

> having research denied on that basis, it amazes me if I ever hear

> someone make any reference to the role of emotions in their

illness

> without wishing it plainly understood that if their physiological

> illness were addressed, there would be no need for any palliative

> psychiatric interventions.

>

> Remember when Herpes raced through the population?

> People would say that " Stress causes Herpes " because they would

have

> a flare-up after an emotional problem? And prior to Acyclovir,

> people tried all kinds of stress reduction to " get rid of Herpes " .

> But no amount of stress can ever " cause Herpes " if one doesn't

have

> the viral infection. And peoples mental state didn't seem to have

> much of a role in whether one catches Herpes or not.

> I'm all in favor of Herpes sufferers reducing stress to control

> their infection, but I got myself in trouble with them for saying

> that stress cannot cause Herpes in exactly the same way I make

> people angry for insisting that stress cannot cause CFS.

> And they say " You cannot leave stress out of it " .

> When it comes to the basic issue of whether or not one has a virus

> or catches I virus - I believe that I can.

>

> If you view the role of stress as nothing more than an

exacerbating

> factor in CFS, then I'm sorry and apologize for my misunderstanding

>

> -

>

[Guest guest]

-why do you think that the Incline Village and Royal Free

sufferrers were 'hit hardest' by CFS? There are many PWCs who

contracted CFS (or what is dx'd as CFS) apart from any

epidemic. As a matter of fact, probably less than 5% contracted

CFS in an epidemic, and many of these 95% are either housebound

or bedbound years after onset. Or maybe I am not understanding

your statement which is a likely possibility.

Mike C.

> Wow. Neat!

> It's amazing that theorizers have tried so hard to impress the

> concept of " burnout " and " rundown " upon a situation in which the

> actual people who were hit hardest is in direct opposition to the

> theory.

> -

[Guest guest]

" yakcamp22 " < wrote:

>

> -why do you think that the Incline Village and Royal Free

> sufferrers were 'hit hardest' by CFS? There are many PWCs who

> contracted CFS (or what is dx'd as CFS) apart from any

> epidemic. As a matter of fact, probably less than 5% contracted

> CFS in an epidemic, and many of these 95% are either housebound

> or bedbound years after onset. Or maybe I am not understanding

> your statement which is a likely possibility.

>

> Mike C.

The whole basis of the " immune depressed from your own bad

behaviors, drug use and bad diet " theorists is that the illness hits

those who " didn't take care of themselves " .

The peculiar thing about ME at Royal Free and CFS in Incline is

that the illness didn't target those who these theorists say would

be the very ones to succumb.

It honed in on athletes, schoolteachers, unstressed children and

just plain normal folks.

It really seemed as if you would have been better off if you HAD

been a drug user, alcoholic, person with clinical depression or

patient in a hospital. THEY didn't seem to catch the illness.

That's why I say the illness hit hardest the very people

that " burnout and run down " theorists say would be the LEAST likely

to get it.

And then when you go from athlete to bedbound, to make you fit

their theory, they say " If you succumbed, then you MUST have been a

drug user, bad eater, or had some stress, " fess up " .

Wish I had. Probably wouldn't have got sick.

-

[Guest guest]

" Dianne " <boyzee12000@...> wrote:

******************the problem in a nutshell with you is you do

> not understand the basics of the brain being the main power. You

can only think of what happened to you and cannot get passed

that.Stress is a word but in real terms it means so much more than

you cannot get to understand in your tunnel vision world. If you

would open your perimeters you would see that there is so much more

to the human being. But of course you will never never never never

never never never never never will.****************************

>

Have you stopped to consider that if CFS can be successfully

resolved by mental neuro-immune reprogramming, that this will mean

Professor Wessely is perfectly correct - and all of us who impugned

his name and condemned his modalities of cognitive behavioral

therapy will be honor-bound to apologize?

And then we must all acquiesce to receiving psychiatric therapy?

(After all I've said, I'd have to do some serious groveling)

-