Dear Barbara and others,
What i tried to explain what is going wrong, is picked up by several members of the board in the contributions following.
Babara, the role of Reeves in the CDC is a dubble role, for a very long time he did sabotage the development of our case. Now that there is hard/objective evidence, he has to adjust his opinion. Summerized we can state that he plays a political role [like the other politicans].
I copy below what recently is written about him:
CDC's Big Tent *Fatiguing illnesses*
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hello,
Dr. Reeves in his empirical definition (2005) is proposing that if
you are fatigued and disabled to some extent and have a certain
symptom profile and don't have any other diseases, then by
definition you have CFS.
Dr. Jason, however, pointed out that several of the Reeves
questionnaires in the SF-36 and MFI concentrate solely on
emotional or mental aspects of fatigue and disability. Two SF-36
questionnaires focus on emotional problems and mental health
and one MFI questionnaire focuses on reduced motivation. This
suggests that under the new CDC criteria fatigued people with
emotional problems but not necessarily with the physical
components of CFS could meet the criteria for CFS and
participate in CFS studies.
The 1994 CDC revised case definition, broadened what could
be researched under the name of "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome"
by calling for an "integrated approach to the evaluation,
classification, and study of persons with CFS and other fatiguing
illnesses."
Then, throughout the text of the case definition, they seek to lay a
framework and some justification to get these "fatiguing
illnesses" into the CFS research funding structure.
This shaky foundation, as Craig Maupin has pointed out,
http://www.cfidsrepo.....inition 3.htmhas led to deemphasizing the Activity/exertion response in
M.E./CFS, in which the hallmark type of fatigue experienced is
very distinct. First, it is closely related to exertion response.
People with M. E./CFS typically have an exacerbation of
symptoms 24-72 hours after exertion. M. E./CFS sufferers
typically describe paying a price for the activities they wish to
participate in. Unlike the typical fatigue experienced by healthy
people, sleep or rest cannot alleviate it. Those with M. E./CFS
also describe this fatigue as flu-like. This very distinct type of
fatigue is the most telling symptom of M. E./CFS, and it is
testable with the "Bicycle Ergometry Test with Gas Analysis"
showing almost immediate movement to anaerobic threshold in
M. E./CFS patients in contrast to normal controls.
In contrast, according to the 1994 CDC CFS case definition, a
diagnosis of CFS can be made in patients without this hallmark
symptom should a researcher choose to do so. Researchers
may simply choose from a set of symptoms which fits their
whims and interests.
Also, nailing down the diagnosis of CFS becomes a long,
frustrating process for both patient and physician, internists said.
There is no diagnostic test or laboratory marker for CFS, so
physicians must rule out other potential causes, like thyroid or
neurological disorders, before they confirm the diagnosis. Since
the main symptoms of CFS-fatigue, pain, headaches-are
common to many other illnesses, the exclusion process means
repeat visits, a lot of lab work, and a lot of time.
As Craig points out, the authors of the 1994 Fukuda criteria go
on to encourage physicians and researchers to integrate into
CFS research samples "Any condition defined primarily by
symptoms that cannot be confirmed by diagnostic laboratory
tests, including fibromyalgia, anxiety disorders, somatoform
disorders, nonpsychotic or nonmelancholic depression,
neurasthenia, and multiple chemical sensitivity disorder."
Thus, the authors were crafting was a recipe for confusion and
conflicting results.
Of course, the distinct neurological disease, Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis with clear criteria and some distinct testing
parameters has been buried even though the history is clear
since the 1934 Los Angeles epidemic and the cover-up was
thoroughly investigated and reported by Hillary Johnson in the
newly updated book, Osler's Web: Inside the Labyrinth of the
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Epidemic (Paperback - June 8,
2006).
Meanwhile in the rest of the world where Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis has not been removed from the view of the
general public & from medical professionals, Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis is NOT a "subgroup" or "subset" of Fatiguing
Illnesses/CFS.
Instead, ME is an autonomous, infectious neurological entity
ICD-10 G93.3
Steven Du Pre
Barbara and other, as a result the following reaction in the internation ME world:
Who wrote:
"....Dr. Jason, however, pointed out that several of the Reeves
questionnaires in the SF-36 and MFI concentrate solely on
emotional or mental aspects of fatigue and disability. Two SF-36
questionnaires focus on emotional problems and mental health
and one MFI questionnaire focuses on reduced motivation. This
suggests that under the new CDC criteria fatigued people with
emotional problems but not necessarily with the physical
components of CFS could meet the criteria for CFS and
participate in CFS studies...."
``
Yes the EVIL is in these questionnaires; I suppose Dr. Reeves
plotted with the Wessely School; not alone to *broaden* the
criteria by making a *Big Tent "Fatiguing illnesses"*, but also to
get much better results with Cognitive Behavioural Therapy
(CBT)
See: "28th Society of Behavioural Medicine Annual Meeting &
Scientific Sessions March 21-24, 2007"
With among others: Reeves, Chalder and White.
http://listserv.noda...RE&P=R3844&I=-3These questionnaires are a big present for the Insurance
Industry.
See for example the results of the *fatigue experts* from
Nijmegen (V.d Meer and Bleijenberg, et all.)
In their notorious study: *Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic
fatigue syndrome: a multicentre randomised controlled trial*
(Lancet 2001). Used criteria: Fukuda with EXCEPTION of the
symptom criteria !
Success rate: full recovery of 30%
In a new study: *Is a Full Recovery Possible after Cognitive
Behavioural Therapy for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome?* -
Psychother Psychosom 2007;76:171–176 - H. Knoop, G.
Bleijenberg, M.F.M. Gielissen, J.W.M. van der Meer, P.D. White
Used criteria: the COMPLETE Fukuda AND those
questionnaires (SF-36, CIS, and FQL) !
And suddenly the result of full recovery is 70% !
````
LaVonne Woodruff wrote on Co-Cure to Director Gerberding:
"....Dr. Wm Reeves needs to be removed immediately from his
position!...."
And Derek Enlander MD wrote among other things::
"...As chief of Virus and Rickettsial Disease in a government
institution, Reeves should stick to infectious disease and
immunology.
Speaking at a Psychiatric convention on psychiatric aspects of
ME/CFS seems bizarre for an infectious disease specialist.
Reeves must go...."
``
YES, it is high time: Reeves MUST GO !
Babara and other, i assume this contributes to what i tried to tell all of you.
Let me use the following example:
You have two different deseases the flu and aids. Aids does share some of the symtoms of the flu. But the symtoms shared by these two deseases, have a different cause. What the psychological world tries in our case, is to extrapolate the findings in aids to the flu. So suppose we have the flu, accordingly to the pyschological researchers we have to be treated like we have aids.
It is our duty to make the world aware of this cruelty/cirminal behavoir, and that is what also is pointed out in my previous messages and in this one.
Hope this helps
greetings
ferdi
Netherlands
By the way, are you all from the same region in Italy, which part ? do you also meet eachother in real sometime ?
ferdi