1) Meanwhile at he neighbours overseas: "Over two years on from the outbreak of the pandemic, this (...) condition is adding to Britain’s labour market crisis, contributing to the highest number of people out of work because of long-term sickness in almost two decades."
3) We don't have these numbers like UK does because they are not registered. I think: a cardinal mistake. You can´t solve or prevent a problem that you don´t see clearly enough. And we don't see it enough.
4) We invest relatively little money in research of LC. One of the studies we run is CBT for LC, named ReCOVer (zonmw.nl/nl/over-zonmw/…). We know this treatment from CBT for ME/CFS. The scientifical basis for this has been rejected in a review in 2021.
5) To my knowledge there isn't a proper basis for CBT for LC either. As a psychologist myself I'm deeply ashamed and baffled by my own profession who doesn't appear to question this strongly. They are obligated to do so by their professional code. (psynip.nl/uw-beroep/bero…).
6) To make things worse: most studies into LC in the Netherlands aren't biomedical. That doesn't reflect the nature of subtypes of LC (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34888989). Interestingly enough: one of the probable subtypes of LC is ME/CFS.
7) The Gezondheidsraad has stated that biomedical research into this condition is absolutely necessary. (gezondheidsraad.nl/documenten/adv…). In the meantime an essential biomedical study of Rob Wüst for LC isn't financed and he needs to crowdfund (
8) Apparantly the personal convictions, preferences and/or interests of professors in psychology can be leading in this country, instead of the most recent scientifcal developments (for further substantiation of this claim:
1) Being involved in this study, Hans Knoop has declared: "Competing Interest Statement. The authors have declared no competing interest." However he is highly involved in the ReCOVer study, investigating the effect of CGT on Long Covid. medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
2) In his review for NICE in 2021 of the scientific basis for GET and CGT for ME/CFS, J. Edwards has concluded that one of the reasons that studies on this topic are of low quality, is the heightened risk of expectation bias in these studies and subjective outcome measures.
3) Also: there is no solid base for the theoretical grounding of CBT for CFS. My logical conclusion is that it doesn't exist for LC either. If it doesn't apply to ME/CFS (post viral disease in the majority of the cases), how can it apply to LC? nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206…