Due to weak to very weak quality of evidence, CBT and GET are no longer recommended for the treatment of people with ME by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the UK. The era of the "biopsychosocial" model is seeing its end. The reasons... 1/
..are clear and need no further elaboration: For the past decades, proponents of the idea that people can treat or even cure ME through psychotherapy or graded exercise have failed to show that these treatments perform better than placebo. 2/
While many GPs have long abandoned the mantra that "exercise is good for everyone", some are going to cling on to these outdated ideas. The reasons are manifold but they often have one thing in common: conflict of interest. 3/
Such individuals may have built careers developing/practicing the now refuted "biopsychosocial" model, have close ties to its proponents, work as consultants for insurance companies that want to avoid paying benefits etc. 4/
In any case, I am confident that the majority of the medical community will embrace this long overdue change. Patient surveys show that large numbers of people with ME get worse from exercising. The consequence for treatment is clear. First, do no harm. 5/
I also would like to repeat a point I have made earlier. This does not mean that CBT is useless for people suffering from chronic diseases. It can help people cope with their situation. However, at least in the case of ME (and likely #longcovid), they won't cure the disease. 6/
As the biological basis of ME is getting more established, and its overlap with #LongCovid is becoming clearer every day (see e.g. article below among many), critical scientific progress that leads to treatments will hopefully be made within due time. 7/ pnas.org/content/118/34…
Another unblinded CBT trial from Chalder, who is known for her methodologically-disputed work on CFS, finding no effect on primary outcomes among people with "medically unexplained symptoms." Some effects are observed on secondary outcomes, but... 1/
correction for multiple comparisons was not applied. The authors state: "Throughout this paper, we present unadjusted p-values. Methods for adjusting the family-wise error by methods such as the Bonferroni correction are known to be conservative..." 2/
"however, if one were to use a method that controlled the false-discovery rate such as the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure then the differences on PHQ-15, WSAS at 20 weeks and CGI remained statistically significant and would therefore be considered as discoveries after..." 3/
No matter how esteemed a scholar is, a personal post-hoc explanation for why oneself recovered from a given disease remains what it is: post-hoc speculation with negligible scientific value. At the same time, if this speculation proves wrong, the consequences can be fatal. 1/
For instance, adhering to unproven treatments can in the case of serious diseases such as cancer lead to a manifold risk of death. jamanetwork.com/journals/jamao… 2/
Obviously, #longcovid is not cancer, but research so far suggests that it is highly debilitating. Its causes remain uncertain, more research is needed, and scholars will naturally disagree for some time - possibly forever. 3/
Historically, medical conditions that disproportionally affect women have falsely been attributed to psychological causes, often referred to with euphemism such as "biopsychological". Yet I am shocked to read this about #longcovid in 2020! 1/
In addition to reflecting implicit sexism and being unwarranted by the data, such conclusions
- gaslight patients to believe it is "all in their head"
- direct research away from the search for treatable biological causes
- bias medical practitioners in their assessment
2/
Finally, they propagate circular and unfalsifiable "biopsychological" disease models. (a) If no evidence for biological abnormalities can be observed with currently available techniques, a disease is attributed to psychological causes. 3/
Scientific understandings of diseases have never been static but always subject to change and revision. Often, big scientific leaps take place in times of crisis. My prediction is that the wave of #LongCovid-19 will fundamentally change how we view post-viral conditions. 1/
I believe that the “cognitive era” of post-viral conditions will find its end rather soon. That is not to say that CBT won’t have its place in the treatment of patients. It can be crucial in helping them cope with their illness. But it cannot solve its physical causes. 2/
Evidence for the biological basis of diseases such as #MECFS is mounting and promising early developments of diagnostic blood tests have been recently published in world-leading journals such as PNAS. pnas.org/content/116/21… 3/
For decades, post-viral physical symptoms have been trivialized as psychological. Based on shaky empirical grounds, people have been left with CBT as their only treatment option. Now it is COVID19 long haulers’ time to be told “it’s all in their heads.” #LongCovid#covid1in20 1/
Many of those infected by COVID19 don’t fully recover and physicians call for research into the causes, which we currently know very little about. However, some psychotherapists have already attributed it to long haulers being “more prone to distress” shorturl.at/wLSYZ 2/
The solution? Cognitive Behavioral Therapy! Don’t get me wrong. As a psychologist, I have no doubt that many people (ill and not ill) can profit from CBT. But it’s stunning that some already assume it can cure medical conditions that we still know very little about. 3/