CFS Personality Type Survey

[Guest guest]

Hi Everyone,

I have added a new poll, a personality type survey. The goal is to

find out whether there are common personality variables among list

members, and perhaps to some extent in the general PWC population.

Informal surveys conducted for other loosly related conditions have

shown some interesting personality correlations. My own thinking is

that if genetics plays a role in CFS, then perhaps there will be some

common personality variables, assuming that genetics also plays some

role in personality development.

So here is the question for the poll: What is your Myers-Briggs

personality type?

To respond to this poll, enter your Myers-Briggs type (MBTI). If you

do not know your type, a brief informal test is available free online

at http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp . That test takes

about 5 minutes, or 10 if you have brain fog...

The result of the test will be a four letter abbreviation for your

personality type. If you then google your abbreviation, you should

find some interesting web resources about your type. Or you can go to

http://www.typelogic.com, and look at their brief summaries for each type.

And don't forget to vote! To vote, please visit the following web page:

/surveys?id=2352297

Thanks!

--Kurt

[Guest guest]

I was typical left brain dominant judging type person whole my life but this

test gave a result of P. I wonder if this change occured due to terrible

late stage neurological problems occured during the last 6 years.(I can not

think much any more)

bw

Nil

Re: CFS Personality Type Survey

> My bad. Jung characterized six traits through his life time of studying

> people while the " J "

> and " P " came into view after his time to bring the total to eight. BTW,

> imaging studies

> now seem to verify the " J " as being strongly indicative of left brain

> dominance while the " P "

> means right brain dominance...Jung was an INTP(I think Cort on this list

> may be one as

> well, the most rare or least commonly found of the sixteen types).

>

>

>

> " davidhall2020 " <davidhall@...> wrote:

>>

>> Hi, Kurt.

>>

>>

>>

>> I think the results from this poll may be interesting. I also think

>> there is a mistake(not

> by

>> you) already in the percentages suggested are in the general poplulation

>> of each of the

>> sixteen temperments at the link that states them.

>>

>>

>>

>> Though probably not the most important issue to consider, the percentages

>> appear

>> dramatically off target based on my study of the cutting edge expert in

>> this arena

> named

>> Jon Niednagel. For instance, his empirical study of what he coins

>> braintypes

>> (www.braintypes.com) over the last thirty years of each of these original

>> Carl Jung

>> observations of eight mental traits(body traits also correlate) in people

>> shows the ENTP

> to

>> be the most common and commonly found among them.

>>

>>

>>

>> The other trouble for those who don't arleady know their temperment type

>> in this field

> is

>> two fold. One, typically people tend to want to answer the test

>> questions according to

>> how they would prefer to be viewed and even prefer to view themselves

>> though the test

> is

>> after empirical realities over perception.

>>

>>

>>

>> Throw sickness and long term sickness into this inherent bias we as

>> people have and

> you

>> can begin to see that skewed test results, particularly the " E " vs " I "

>> which technically

>> represents inherent energy expenditure preference an " E " has vs the

>> energy

> conservation

>> preference an " I " has, might readily occur. Also if I recall correctly,

>> it's very common for

>> inherent " T " (Thinkers) to want be viewed or view themselves as

>> " F " (Feelers) and the

>> converse is true as well.

>>

>>

>>

>> Niednagel has an interesting way to get away from these errors as noted

>> at his website

>> that I've found quite powerful. One key is realizing this specific area

>> of type testing and

>> what Jung was doing was NOT about trying to get at subject perceptions of

>> ourselves(ie,

>> what braintype we think or feel we are), but actual object trait

>> observations of the eight

>> originally characterized by Jung.

>>

>>

>>

>> The idea that these are genetically inherent and indellable, regardless

>> of nuture, seems

>> 100% accurate though of course these eight traits aren't all there is to

>> consider in a

>> persons make-up and environment can influence how they're expressed.

>> I look forward to this survey's results.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> " Kurt Rowley " <kurtrowley@> wrote:

>> And don't forget to vote! To vote, please visit the following web page:

>> >

>> > /surveys?id=2352297

>> >

>> > Thanks!

>> >

>> > --Kurt

>> >

>>

>

>

>

>

>

> This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with each

> other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any treatment

> discussed here, please consult your doctor.

>

[Guest guest]

Hi all,

I find this quite interesting stuff. I did the test and am an 'ENFJ'.

Other than the brief description given at the end of the test I don't

really know what this means - does anybody have ref to more detailed

interpretation? I just want to see how accurate this all really is (in

the same way I read horoscopes to see how accurate they are - always

wrong, not surprisingly ! ).

Rosie

I was typical left brain dominant judging type person whole my life but

this

test gave a result of P. I wonder if this change occured due to terrible

late stage neurological problems occured during the last 6 years.(I can

not

think much any more)

bw

Nil

Re: CFS Personality Type Survey

> My bad. Jung characterized six traits through his life time of

studying

> people while the " J "

> and " P " came into view after his time to bring the total to eight.

BTW,

> imaging studies

> now seem to verify the " J " as being strongly indicative of left brain

> dominance while the " P "

> means right brain dominance...Jung was an INTP(I think Cort on this

list

> may be one as

> well, the most rare or least commonly found of the sixteen types).

>

>

>

> " davidhall2020 " <davidhall@...> wrote:

>>

>> Hi, Kurt.

>>

>>

>>

>> I think the results from this poll may be interesting. I also think

>> there is a mistake(not

> by

>> you) already in the percentages suggested are in the general

poplulation

>> of each of the

>> sixteen temperments at the link that states them.

>>

>>

>>

>> Though probably not the most important issue to consider, the

percentages

>> appear

>> dramatically off target based on my study of the cutting edge expert

in

>> this arena

> named

>> Jon Niednagel. For instance, his empirical study of what he coins

>> braintypes

>> (www.braintypes.com) over the last thirty years of each of these

original

>> Carl Jung

>> observations of eight mental traits(body traits also correlate) in

people

>> shows the ENTP

> to

>> be the most common and commonly found among them.

>>

>>

>>

>> The other trouble for those who don't arleady know their temperment

type

>> in this field

> is

>> two fold. One, typically people tend to want to answer the test

>> questions according to

>> how they would prefer to be viewed and even prefer to view themselves

>> though the test

> is

>> after empirical realities over perception.

>>

>>

>>

>> Throw sickness and long term sickness into this inherent bias we as

>> people have and

> you

>> can begin to see that skewed test results, particularly the " E " vs

" I "

>> which technically

>> represents inherent energy expenditure preference an " E " has vs the

>> energy

> conservation

>> preference an " I " has, might readily occur. Also if I recall

correctly,

>> it's very common for

>> inherent " T " (Thinkers) to want be viewed or view themselves as

>> " F " (Feelers) and the

>> converse is true as well.

>>

>>

>>

>> Niednagel has an interesting way to get away from these errors as

noted

>> at his website

>> that I've found quite powerful. One key is realizing this specific

area

>> of type testing and

>> what Jung was doing was NOT about trying to get at subject

perceptions of

>> ourselves(ie,

>> what braintype we think or feel we are), but actual object trait

>> observations of the eight

>> originally characterized by Jung.

>>

>>

>>

>> The idea that these are genetically inherent and indellable,

regardless

>> of nuture, seems

>> 100% accurate though of course these eight traits aren't all there is

to

>> consider in a

>> persons make-up and environment can influence how they're expressed.

>> I look forward to this survey's results.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> " Kurt Rowley " <kurtrowley@> wrote:

>> And don't forget to vote! To vote, please visit the following web

page:

>> >

>> > http://groups.

</surveys?id=2352297>

/group//surveys?id=2352297

>> >

>> > Thanks!

>> >

>> > --Kurt

>> >

>>

>

>

>

>

>

> This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with

each

> other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any

treatment

> discussed here, please consult your doctor.

>

[Guest guest]

I came back ENTP, but my answers to many questions would have been

different in my pre-morbid state (before CFS). So there might be

a huge selection bias error in this survey if other responders

would have answered differently pre CFS.

Do these surveys have to get approved by a moderator before they

are allowed on this list? Just curious.

Mike C

In , " Adrienne G. "

<duckblossm@...> wrote:

>

> Probably. When we lose a faculty we adapt by depending more on

what we still have.

> Adrienne

> Re: Re: CFS Personality Type Survey

>

>

> I was typical left brain dominant judging type person whole my

life but this

> test gave a result of P. I wonder if this change occured due to

terrible

> late stage neurological problems occured during the last 6 years.

(I can not

> think much any more)

> bw

> Nil

[Guest guest]

Nil> You said some types need support groups. Do you have any idea

which types

> those are?

As I reviewed several types a few days ago I found several with

support groups. Unfortunately I did not save those URLs, but if you

google your type you should find whether there are such groups.

My own thinking about this - probably the most obvious need for

'personality type' support is for extroverts who are in the rare

types. This is because they may stand out as 'different' and instead

of social support, which they need, they may get a lot of negative

feedback and be quite unpopular. But their personality drives them to

continually seek social validation, meaning they receive continual

rebuff. I think that may also apply to many who were at one time

Extroverts but became more Introverted due to the illness. I know

someone on this thread speculated that many INTJs would be ENTJs if

they were well.

Also, I suspect from what I have read that some of the types can have

inherent inner conflicts. The INTJ actually seems to be one of those,

because being both intuitive (flexible) and judging (inflexible) may

be a bit of a problem in some situations. But I am no expert here,

perhaps some else could address the inner conflict issue better.

You may get some clues about types that are prone to social stress by

reviewing the types at typelogic.com, for instance:

" ESFJs are easily wounded. And when wounded, their emotions will not

be contained. They by nature " wear their hearts on their sleeves, "

often exuding warmth and bonhomie, but not infrequently boiling over

with the vexation of their souls. "

Probably there are other issues like this as well for various types.

Of course these are just generalizations. If you are a P you know

that, but some Js may just say 'well that is not exactly right' and I

think they would miss the point.

--Kurt

[Guest guest]

Hi Everyone,

I just want to make a few comments on this thread. I originally

posted the survey because I ran across studies of people with

Depression, finding a statistically significant correlation with their

MBTI. Incidentally, their dominant type was ISFP, and a close second

was ESFP. I was not really expecting a result as dramatic as the poll

is showing now for CFS, we are clearly falling into the INFJ type, or

a closely related type.

The general conclusion I draw from this type of correlation is that

this provides some evidence that the illness has genetic

characteristics, as the MBTI type of most people is at least partly

genetically determined.

But maybe there is more to learn here as well. My own speculation is

that aside from providing evidence of some type of genetic involvement

in CFS, that the INFJ type, or a closely related type, may be a

personality that is more heavily burdened by neurotoxin illness, due

to being a more reflective personality, perhaps creating a higher

stress perception. And perhaps this higher stress perception adds to

the glutathione depletion and other problems.

Incidentally, I may post a similar poll to a large Lyme group.

Given the simliarities between conditions, I think this could be an

interesting comparison/contrast.

--Kurt

[Guest guest]

Kurt, I just wonder which kind of " genetic " you are meaning. Jung used it but it

was pretty clear that he did not mean a physical transmission of

characteristics. He seems to have meant a genetics that was more spiritual, or

soulish.

I have never heard of any physical correlations of actual genes with types. HAve

I missed something?

Adrienne

Re: CFS Personality Type Survey

Hi Everyone,

I just want to make a few comments on this thread. I originally

posted the survey because I ran across studies of people with

Depression, finding a statistically significant correlation with their

MBTI. Incidentally, their dominant type was ISFP, and a close second

was ESFP. I was not really expecting a result as dramatic as the poll

is showing now for CFS, we are clearly falling into the INFJ type, or

a closely related type.

The general conclusion I draw from this type of correlation is that

this provides some evidence that the illness has genetic

characteristics, as the MBTI type of most people is at least partly

genetically determined.

But maybe there is more to learn here as well. My own speculation is

that aside from providing evidence of some type of genetic involvement

in CFS, that the INFJ type, or a closely related type, may be a

personality that is more heavily burdened by neurotoxin illness, due

to being a more reflective personality, perhaps creating a higher

stress perception. And perhaps this higher stress perception adds to

the glutathione depletion and other problems.

Incidentally, I may post a similar poll to a large Lyme group.

Given the simliarities between conditions, I think this could be an

interesting comparison/contrast.

--Kurt

This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with each

other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any treatment

discussed here, please consult your doctor.

[Guest guest]

I agree with you Mike. MB test results change depending on life

circumstances.

Gail

kcamp22 wrote:

>

> Kurt-what I was trying to say in an earlier post on this thread is that

> I believe many of the responders would have responded differently

> pre CFS. I mean, how many really sick PWCs seek large groups of

> people to be in, want to be in the middle of the room, would rather

> go to a party than read a good book, etc?

>

> The purpose of the survey is meritorious, but I just don't think you

> can take the results seriously because you are trying to determine

> what the personality type was *before* CFS rather than during CFS.

> My personality has changed dramatically and I am not nearly as sick

> as some of the list members based on their message about being

> bedridden, etc. I think you would get many more extroverts if you

> were able to go back in time and have the poll done pre-illness.

>

> Mike C

>

>

> >

> > > > If CFS 'does not care' about personality, then we should see a

> > > normal personality distribution among PWC. But that is not what

> the

> > > survey is revealing among the group members.

> > >

> > > Participants in CFS groups - and the subset of those who respond

> to

> > > the poll make this self selective group which possibly skews the

> > > results. The epidemic cases have no such capacity to " self

> select "

> > > and give a clearer indication of just who can fall prey to CFS.

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Other groups may " self select " for a number of different reasons

> and result in an inconsistent pattern in its individuals.

> " Why didn't everyone become ill " is a question that presumes

> everyone had the same exposure. Why doesn't everyone get Malaria,

> TB, AIDS, or anything else? Who would speculate that if a cluster

> of people in a building got E Coli or Hepatitis that any who did not

> must have had some mental factors that made the difference?

> Wouldn't people say it was just common sense that the sick

> individuals were the ones who had the exposure?

Self-selection can certainly not be ruled-out. But without a careful

experimental design, self-selection also can not be assumed. I am

running the MBTI survey right now on a large Lyme group, partly to

address this issue, and so far the results mirror the responses from

this group. That supports my idea that the MBTI score is consistent

with a genetic typing that is over-represented in PWC and apparently

PWL for some reason. I also asked a friend to take the online MBTI.

He has CFS and is not involved in any kind of internet groups, no

support groups for CFS, etc., and his MBTI was INFJ, which is the

dominant group on this list so far. I admit this is not a lot of

evidence, but it is something, and does suggest the finding here is

not a fluke.

Also, most PWC today were not involved in a cluster. I believe

clusters have stronger triggers than what most PWC experience, so

clusters may not be good models for all forms of CFS in the population

today. Clusters are probably homogeneous triggers, such as sick

building syndrome, or a particularly nasty virus, a strong EMF

exposure, a communicable bacterial infection, etc. But what we see on

these groups seems to be the result of heterogeneous triggers acting

on a common genetic weakness.

> As you say: " correlation is not causation " , but the epidemic

> cohorts show that at least under certain conditions, there is no

> correlation of personality traits to be found..

>

> The Truckee teachers and basketball team members are still sick -

> as Dr noted in his 1999 " original CFS cohort study " that

> was reported on CNN, although some have had " substantial

> improvements " .

Again, this is opinion. Unless you measure the personality traits

(actually we are talking about MBTI, which is a temperment measure),

there is no way to know whether this opinion that there was no

correlation with personality traits is correct. Also, there could be

common genetic factors in the subset of the Truckee teachers and team

members who have remained sick. And those genetic traits could

translate into both immunological and temperment groupings.

> I believe that there is no lack of exploration into the " CFS

> personality " from any possible physiological changes or gene

> alterations.

> Professor Wessely, Kings College and the Nijmegen School of

> Psychiatry have long been very intent on demonstrating such a

> correlation on the presumption that despite protestations of people

> claiming that they simply became ill - that such a connection must

> surely exist.

I am not familiar with Wessly's work, and am not really interested in

that angle because I believe CFS is a physiological disorder, but

based on what I have heard on this list he was not studying genetic

temperment variables. So that does not really apply. The personality

issue is not psychology, it is not 'pathological thinking'.

> I believe that when it comes to attributions of " hysteria " and

> concepts of behavioral maladaptative processes that have been

> historically applied inappropriately to emerging illnesses,

> no " last word " is necessary to know that diseases that now have an

> identifiable etiology can no longer be categorized as mental

> illnesses as they once were - but never should have been.

I believe this is partly true, but has nothing to do with the topic

being discussed. Correlation of MBTI type with an illness is not

'categorizing as mental illness'. Rather I believe it is a

progressive exploration that supports a physiological, brain-based

basis of CFS. Personally, I believe that we may have a brain

structure that is simply over-sensitive to certain biotoxin exposures,

and probably we also have methylation defects that lead to a higher

exposure level. The common MBTI type could be derived from the same

brain structure variation as our over-sensitivity. And

over-sensitivity to biological or emotional stressors can cause many

of the depletions we see in CFS.

--Kurt

[Guest guest]

Hi,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/ghostgenes.shtml

This link refers to research on inheriting not only genes, but also

gene expressions from ancestors. I think this concept could be very

important for explanations of familial occurring CFS on the one hand

and clusters of unrelated persons, exposed to the same environment,

on the other.

I.e. you could inherit the gene expressions for CFS/ME from your

grandmother, or you could produce them yourself if exposed severe

and/or long enough to some threat.

nne

>

> > Why? Why is sporadic illness - that satisfies, e.g. the

Canadian

> > Guidelines - different than cluster illness? It might argue a

> > different cause but the end-state looks the same.

> >

> > I thought we were discussing ME, which is recognized in both

> epidemic and sporadic forms.

> >

>

> > , I am sorry that you've gotten big doses of AIYH over the

> years, but that doesn't mean that mental/emotional factors must

be

> completely ignored. They just have to be in their rightful

place -

> a possible co-factor in a disease that is ultimately dysfunction

of

> neurological, immune, and endocrine systems.

> >

> > - Bob Niederman

> >

>

> I didn't say sporadic was different than cluster illness.

> I said that if you formulate a hypothesis that depends on

individual

> characteristics of extreme rarity - that automatically excludes

the

> cohorts in which such a phenomenon would be astronomically

> improbable. The very clue that led Polly Murray to bring

attention

> to Lyme disease.

> And these cluster outbreaks were the very people used as

prototypes

> for CFS.

> So if a hypothesis depends upon and can only be reconciled with

> individualistic factors, it excludes itself from CFS.

> Again, Polly Murrays observation of " genetic JRA " that hit Lyme

> Conn. in " impossible " numbers.

>

> When I say CFS, as an Incline survivor, you may be assured that

I

> am describing " original CFS " or ME/CFS Canadian.

>

> Any degree to which this illness may be corrected by

> mental/emotional factors is the degree to which it IS a

> mental/emotional illness.

> The ME/CFS phenomenon that I observed is a horrifying

physiological

> illness that has emotional lability as a consequence - not as a

> cause. Yes I can ignore all assertions of mental causality, they

> have no place in this illness.

>

> When I say this illness was unknown, I mean it was unknown by

all

> who saw it. The statements of Dr Cheney, Dr , Dr Bell,

Dr

> Rhyll and all who saw this indicate clearly that this was

completely

> outside their experience and knowledge.

> Royal Free was similarly unknown at the time.

> We had people crossing the world and finding no one who could

> express the circumstances of the illness to them.

> Doctors didn't know it. Our families didn't know it. The CDC/NIH

> didn't know it. Our Grandparents had never seen anything like it.

>

> After all these years, the number of doctors in the U.S. who

have

> since expressed their familiarity can almost be counted on one

hand.

> It has been amazing to see years of " CFS can't exist because no

one

> has ever seen anything like this - and it could not have gone

> unnoticed " replaced with the amazing concept that " CFS has

always

> existed and is so common that it is unnoticeable as being

anything

> out of the ordinary " .

> We are talking about schoolchildren who CANNOT STAND UP.

> Not something you forget.

> -

>

>

>

>

>

>

> -------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------

>

>

> No virus found in this incoming message.

> Checked by AVG Free Edition.

> Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.5/483 - Release Date:

10/18/2006

>

>

>