MAGICAL MEDICINE: HOW TO MAKE AN ILLNESS ... - Invest in ME

220
Since it is unequivocal that people with ME/CFS show markers of inflammation, the PACE Trial (predicated
on the assumptions of deconditioing, on the “perception” of effort and on aberrant illness beliefs and whose
participants are instructed on “sleep hygiene”) cannot but be seen as ill‐conceived.
In Bergen, Professor White did, however, mention some interesting facts about the PACE Trial: according to
him there are 641 participants; there is a 6% drop‐out rate from treatment, and a particular difficulty was
that they had trouble recruiting and training new therapists.
Notably, because of participant recruitment problems, the support of the Prime Minister (PM) was sought
and the PM ‐‐‐ who is neither a physician nor a medical scientist ‐‐ apparently agreed to say: “As with all
serious illnesses, it is important that patients, their families and the healthcare professionals looking after them have
the best scientific information available and the PACE trial has been designed to help them decide for themselves
what treatment is likely to be the best from (sic) them” (White’s slide gave an incorrect URL that was incorrectly
copied from the Number 10 website; the correct URL is http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page14656).
Given that the Wessely School does not accept the “best scientific information available” about ME/CFS and
that PACE Trial participants – some of whom may be as young as 17 – may be so disempowered that they
may be unable to “decide for themselves”, it can only be speculated who provided the text for the PM.
In his Bergen presentation, Professor White failed to mention what patients think of PACE, which is also on
the Prime Minister’s website:
“The latest DWP Guidelines and PACE are still directing the Health Service to treat ME sufferers with GET and CBT
(a tool used for mental illnesses) despite the mounting evidence from a vast amount of research proving that ME is an
organic not a psychosomatic disease and that the treatments forced onto those affected do in fact cause more harm than
good and can worsen the condition of patients…Patients should not be forced into becoming psychiatric cases or lose
their benefits”.
Notably, Professor White said in Bergen that the primary outcomes of the PACE Trial are the statistics on
“fatigue and disability” and – significantly – that the aim of the PACE Trial is “Health economics and
societal costs”.
So there we have it: the PACE Trial is not about curing the sick or the advancement of medical science but is
indeed about the cost of “fatigue” to society.
Attention must therefore be drawn to an important paper published in the Annals of General Psychiatry
(Psychiatry during the Nazi era: ethical lessons for the modern professional. Rael D Strous, Ann Gen
Psychiat 2007:6:8: doi:10.1186/1744‐859X‐6‐8) in which the author not only considers why it was psychiatrists
who were most active in playing central and pivotal roles in the Nazi atrocities, but also examines how their
transgressions related to a paradigm shift in how patients were viewed:
“Their actions were a colossal misjudgment based on what today we may term ‘pseudoscience’, but which at the time
was deemed to be correct by many…In addition to resting on poor science, the atrocities of the German psychiatric
establishment were based upon several fundamental errors of ethical, professional, and scientific conduct. While many
may simply brush off any deeper consideration of the issues with the stance that ‘they were just evil’, such an approach
only deepens the risk that such events will be repeated.…Many psychiatrists maintain that they have an inherent
responsibility more than other medical professions to be involved in community affairs. This is because
psychiatry…often involves taking into account societal factors and contemporary ideology…The dangers inherent in
such involvement, while not obvious, are, however, prominent when important boundaries become blurred. Clinical
practice and political machinations need to be kept separate…The management of patients must be dictated primarily
by the patient’s best interests and not by virtue of any ideology that may be prevalent at that time in society. This may
include economic ‘ideological’ considerations…Psychiatrists should be wary of political and economic pressures that