What much of mainstream medicine still perceives.

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

I have been messing around on a medical chatboard of self proclaimed

skeptics on a variety of subject. They have been mostly gracious in their

responses, but FYI, this is what much of main stream medicine still sees.

Quite

disheartening.

Sharon

I posted:

Find this article at:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/localnews/content/localnews/daily/1005gulfwar

..html

The response was:

Thanks for sending this.

However, this article is one more of hundreds of similar ones attempting to

describe the complex symptoms as organic syndromes and diseases, which they

are not.

This is not new. We have followed the body of complaints, descriptions,

attempts at legislation, attempted cures, etc.for decades, and through the

various name changes.

We think the problem is one disorder - somatization disorder. It is well

described, books are written on it, and we are agreed that it is a set of

perceived symptoms precipitated by depression and failure of the individual to

cope

successfully with life situations and to adjust to traumas and stresses. If

you can stand reading about this, I recommend Shorter's books - From

Paralysis to Fatigue, which traces the changes in symptoms that have occurred

as medicine itself changes, and the history from mid-19th century and

Charcot and Freud to the present. The book is in lay terminology, easy to read,

and

better than any medical book I have seen.

I will write to the physicians at State for their data. The NIH

people have found a few differences in people with chr. fatigue syndrome such as

blood pressure responses to position changes, but no other organic changes. The

WSU findings would be a first in my experience.

But which enzymes? Liver enzyme changes are common from common drugs

including aspirin and phenacetin, alcohol, etc. It would be hard to adjust for

common drug intake. Most other enzymes are not easily testable.

Summary: I think you are dealing with essentially depressed people, whose

self images are so firmly impressed on their personal views of the world, that

they are essentially unreachable through rational approaches and argument. The

press periodically revives the issue with convincing personal stories and

quotes from naive physicians and scientists who do not have experience in the

field.

Although we deal with these problems in our journal, arguing on the HF

list will be frustrating and unproductive.

If you find this all hard to take and digest, I understand. Take some time

and read, discuss, allow the mind to open to other explanations, and join our

often frustrating group.