|
NICE Guidelines - Your Responses
Here we record responses received about the
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Draft Consultation
Document for clinical guidelines for CFS/ME. Click on the links above for IiME
responses.
Please add your comments using the button
below. Return back to main page on the NICE response
here.
(Please note all messages are
moderated before being posted on this site) |
|
|
Please click the button below to add a
comment
 |
Comments on the
official NICE Guidelines for CFS/ME
|
Martin |
17 Oct 2007 |
|
It is unclear whether their is an organic cause to M E. Failure to establish a
concrete diagnosis does, however, remain a failure of the medical profession and
not a desire of sufferers to remain poorly. Thousands of Lyme disease sufferers
remain undiagnosed for years-or even life, they have a clear organic cause but
the medical profession cant be bothered to find it. the same is likely to be
true for most M E sufferers. What is needed is a more sustained effort and far
more integrity on behalf of the doctors, -not a blame culture as proposed by the
(not so) NICE budget appeasers.
Martin
|
 |
|
Joss |
26 Aug 2007 |
|
Good things in the NICE guidelines...
"Healthcare professionals should be aware that - like all people receiving care
in the NHS - people with CFS/ME have the right to refuse or withdraw from any
component of their care plan without this affecting other aspects of their care,
or future choices about care. "
Joss
|
 |
|
Rosie |
22 Aug 2007 |
On 22nd August (2007), the day on which the appalling NICE Guidelines have been
published, I just want to congratulate all at Invest in ME for the excellent DVD
of the recent Conference.
If only the representatives of NICE had bothered to attend and take note, if
only the nay sayers who extol the psychosocial paradigm could have the integrity
to listen to a much more persuasive argument, then we as sufferers of many years
or many decades standing, might be experiencing a much happier and healthier
state of affairs now.
Let's hope that the call to arms opined by many of the speakers who gave
their time and wealth of knowledge at the Conference can now be realised in
terms of pressure from those who truly understand this illness to ensure a
volte-face by those who pretend they do yet are blinkered by their own egos' and
self satisfied aggrandisement.
|
 |

Comments on the
official NICE Guidelines for CFS/ME.
|
Wendy |
23 Nov 2006 |
|
A magnificent response, so clearly and concisely argued; how can they continue
to peddle these methods in the light of the building evidence and people's
experiences? The authors of this report are failing in their brief by
disregarding this evidence.
Please continue in your efforts to have this document rewritten.
|
 |
|
Caroline |
15 Nov 2006 |
Dear IiME,
Well done on writing such a truthful and accurate
response to the draft NICE guidelines.
Your comments are straight to the point and make
short shift of the mumbo jumbo written by NICE.
I agree wholeheartedly with IiME on every point that you make.
I liked your descriptive phrase "Psychological
warfare operations," (PsyOps), to describe the tactics used by medical staff
who wish to coerce neurological ME patients into accepting inappropriate CBT
and GET.
I am also pleased that you highlighted the problems that ME patients face
when dealing with insurance companies, and the DWP, who refuse to accept
that ME is officially recognised as a neurological illness.
Thank you
From Caroline
|
 |
|
Jacqui |
13 Nov 2006 |
Dear IIME
I have had ME 20yrs, now 64yrs old, and have never come across so much
disbelief, rudeness and incompetence. Even though I had previously
had Asthma since the age of 7yrs, been admitted to hospital 3 times, at death's
door and was lucky to pull through, taken 3/4 different drugs/inhalers, brought
4 children up and worked until 45yrs.
When I went down with ME I was removed from three doctors' panels because I
would not accept that my illness was 'all in the mind' and refused to
take tranquillisers, I was sick not depressed!
I have had some terrible things said and written about me such as, 'This
obese women came to see me with a bundle of papers on ME.'
(I had been prescribed Steroids for 40yrs on and off) 'I
don't know what you want to prove you have ME as there is no cure'.
Wasn't the doc admitting there was such an illness? I have written to MPs, PMs,
Health Dept etc, help set up local ME group but I am now getting both angry and
disillusioned at the whole carry on. I am thinking of seeking legal advice at
the way I have been treated. Regards, Jacqui
|
 |
|
Joan |
13 Nov 2006 |
I was very shocked indeed to read the draft NICE guidelines. I applaud IiME
for there response. I hope that sense will prevail, however I do agree with
IiME that legal representation may well be the only way forward. Sad as this
is, it may well be the only logical thing to do, as those who have written
this draft guidance appear to be blind to the biomedical evidence and out of
step with their peers and contemporaries in other countries, including the
US and Canada.
Please keep pushing for these guidelines to be entirely scraped or
re-written in entirety.
Throughout the document it reads as though ME/CFS is an illness of
choice. Having had the illness for 9 years I have yet to meet one person who
did not hate every day that they had to suffer with this illness.
These guidelines will serve to reduce support from the medical profession
not enhance it. It will pander to those GPs and other health professionals
who still insist that ME/CFS does not exist or is psychologically based.
Those with ME/CFS need not just medical support and empathy but also social
support, for both the sufferer and their carer(s). These guidelines and
their moralising tone will ensure what pitiful services currently available
will likely be reduced and alternatives like GET will be thrust upon
patients. If the patient fails to recover then the patient will be blamed
for not trying hard enough.
Well, enough is enough.
Both morally and ethically NICE need to raise their game.
|
 |
|
Peter |
12 Nov 2006 |
|
Absolutely Brilliant!
Well done to all concerned. Beautifully written and soundly reasoned. A huge
contribution to people with M.E.
Thank You
|
 |
|
Niccola |
12 Nov 2006 |
I have had ME for 11 years now, and have been lucky
that I have not been forced on to a CBT and GET programme. Everything I have
read about the NICE guidelines shows that the psychiatric/ psychology
brigade have a tight hold on what NICE are taking on board.
As the majority of ME sufferers know CBT and GET
are not a cure for this illness and there is evidence that it does not work
and leaves the patient worse off than before they embarked on these
programmes.
What worries me is the fact that they are not
taking on board what many of the stakeholders like your selves, that they
have already made up their minds that the psychiatric/ psychology brigade
are right here. It will also have a knock on effect for PWME getting the
benefits they need, as it is I have applied for DLA 3 times and have been
turned down 3 times. The doctors who come out to do the medical appear to
have little or no knowledge of the disease, and I have found the same when I
have got to the tribunal stage.
Please keep fighting for what PWME really need,
which is training the medical profession and the benefit agency on what this
illness is really like, with the neurological symptoms and the relapses that
are caused when too much is done which often does not occur until 24 to 48
hours after the event.
|
 |
|
Nancy |
11 Nov 2006 |
|
I agree wholeheartedly with the contents of your response to the NICE
guidelines.
In addition, can I offer these thoughts.
My daughter with ME has engaged in all of the "management" techniques
recommended. She is still just as ill as ever. According to the guidelines she
must be a bad patient or hasn't tried hard enough!
The recommendations do not brook "failure to improve" and appear to give GP's
and others a recipe for guaranteed success. So what happens when things get
worse or do not improve?
At the least there should be a list of contraindications as for any
prescription. As written, I would expect a course of GET or CBT would not be
suspended if the patient deteriorated, they would be told to try harder.
I am also very concerned about the review schedule for guidelines as the pace of
change with research now underway internationally is really speeding up.
I own a copy of "Women's own Book of the Home" from 1931. In the Meningitis
section it states, "It is also sometimes caused by children paddling in the hot
sun without hats."
Treatment recommends ice-bags, castor oil, milk and beef tea.
Have we moved on from 1931? How quickly did the medical profession accept new
research and treatment methods? It is terrifying to think how long that book
would have been used for reference.
The guidelines are out of date before they have been published. People with ME
are better off with no guidelines than with the modern-day equivalent guidelines
suggesting beef tea for ME!
|
 |
|
T. |
11 Nov 2006 |
Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on the guidelines: or misguidelines!
I had a major
panic attack the other day when I reached the first paragraph of the short
version. There was no mention of neurological symptoms in the introduction
which was strange as ME is a neurological disease and it was then confirmed to
me that these shoddy guidelines were written by someone who had no knowledge of
ME or was cynically manipulating the situation whereby there would be no
treatment: therefore no cost. It was, unfortunately no surprise to me that this
was so as the review of the evidence was partially skewed to CBT and GET.
Excuse me, but do people with MS have this sort of indignity thrust upon them.
It is strange that such ignorance persists at the same time as the US CDC has
just stated that there is now so much new scientific evidence that there is
clear evidence that ME is a physiological disease and they have implicated the
Genes and HPA axis. Go to
www.scencedaily.com click on medical conditions and scroll down to the
article “CDC Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
I have been
severely affected by GET which appeared to be a wonder cure: at least initially.
No amount of exercising would make me walk as my legs just don’t work.
Probably cerebellar damage. I find it very insulting that there is a thread,
throughout, that people with ME have some false illness belief and “want” to be
ill. I was a newly promoted Lieutenant Colonel in the Army when this struck me
down, and now have an 80% war pension. I was hospitalized with the virus and my
condition has steadily deteriorated over the past 20 years. Ironically I was
invalided from the army for depression but 10 years later it became apparent
that there was much more than depression: mainly reactive to the lousy treatment
by the Army doctors anyway. My pension was then rewritten to show the initial
viral infection in 1985 and then ME from 1994. Should have been 1985 really but
so what. Incidentally I tried to train as a nurse and set up my own woodworking
business, besides renovating 2 houses within the 10 years before proper
diagnosis by a professor at Bath. The consequence of all this effort is, of
course, severe ME.
People with ME do, very often, need counselling because as
you will know only too well this is an illness that can take away everything and
more so everybody. Add to this awful treatment by the medical profession, and
draft NICE instructions, and you have a form of PTSD. This is not the original
ME though. How are hard pressed PCTs who cannot treat other clients who need
CBT to fit everybody in? It’s bonkers and unaffordable. One cannot help but
think that it is just a cynical ploy and that NICE knows very well that there
will be no treatment as the system cannot cope.
There seems to be
no effort to treat the pain side of the illness. I take a cocktail of
Pregabalin for nerve pain and ANS symptoms which are predominant in my case plus
Voltarol and Solpadol for joint and nerve pain. Pain is a major problem for
many but this does not seem to be addressed. In fact I would not recognize from
the guidelines the illness I have and I can’t help think that it is because the
author is prejudiced and thinks ME is a psychological illness. They seem to
have widened the scope and turned it into a dustbin for all illnesses which
include unexplained fatigue. This will do no end of harm to patients in their
treatment and individuals who need benefits: as if it was not so difficult
already.
Finally I find it
totally and utterly exasperating that such persistent ignorance, prejudice and
incompetence can be allowed to occur in NICE when the scientific evidence, at
last, is proving the physiological basis. It has repeatedly put out guidelines
for other illnesses such as cancer, MS, and Alzheimers which have infuriated the
patient groups because they are illogical and inappropriate. What is more
infuriating is the supreme arrogance with which they ignore the views of those
who actually suffer which make an utter mockery of our involvement as
stakeholders. Either NICE is staffed by particularly inept individuals or this
is a deliberate strategy to save money: rightly earning its nick name as the
Institute for Curbing Expenditure!
Sorry to rant but
I am just so disappointed that, again, we are to be cheated of the recognition
people with ME deserve.
|
 |
|
Bernard |
10 Nov 2006 |
Just like to wish you success with your reply to the NICE guidelines,
I have had a brief look at your reply but have found it to hard to really get into it.
I have had ME for 7 years now and have been through the mill of get and CBT and neither of them have helped me one bit.
I find it very hard to concentrate for long periods so find myself relying on people like yourselves to do the groundwork on these sort of things,
I live in hope that nice will listen to what people are saying, but I must admit that
I feel the psychs have to strong a hold on what the outcome will be.
|
 |
|
Judy |
10 Nov 2006 |
I am an M.E sufferer who has made a remarkable
recovery and it certainly was not brought about by CBT and graded exercise -
quite the opposite.
If I have made errors along the way, I would
say it was being treated with anti-depressants and trying to exercise in the
early stages
|
 |
|
Mike |
10 Nov 2006 |
Hello,
Thanks to the Grace Charity and to yourselves for the advice you offer
concerning the rejection of CBT/GET (see
here).
I refer you to the guidelines produced in October by NHS Plus for the Dep't Of
Health... as follows
NHS Plus publication:
"Occupational aspects of the management of chronic fatigue syndrome: evidence
based guidance for employers", in answer to the question
"Is ill-health retirement an option?" gives the following advice:
"Ill-health retirement is a possible outcome although it should only be
considered if appropriate treatments (such as CBT or GET) have been explored. "
I think that this unfortunately will be the way that many companies will handle
the situation and so CBT/GET under duress will be the order of the day.
Already I know of an NHS employee who cannot get to his early -ill health
retirement entitlements unless he goes through the CBT/GET mill.
Each attendance to the clinic results in a relapse and the impression I get from
listening to him is that the clinic staff blame him for his lack of success.
I believe that this is what we face now.
|
 |

|