Before reading this research/advocacy information given in the links below, please be aware of the following facts: 2. The research referred to on this website varies considerably in quality. Some is of a high scientific standard and relates wholly to M.E. and uses the correct terminology. Other studies are included which may only have partial or minor possible relevance to M.E., use unscientific terms/concepts such as ‘CFS,’ ‘ME/CFS,’ ‘CFS/ME,’ ‘CFIDS’ or Myalgic ‘Encephalopathy’ and also include a significant amount of misinformation. Before reading this research it is also essential that the reader be aware of the most commonly used ‘CFS’ propaganda, as explained in A warning on ‘CFS’ and ‘ME/CFS’ research and advocacy and in more detail in Putting research and articles on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis into context.
1. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and ‘Chronic Fatigue Syndrome’ are not synonymous terms. The overwhelming majority of research on ‘CFS’ or ‘CFIDS’ or ‘ME/CFS’ or ‘CFS/ME’ or ‘ICD-CFS’ does not involve M.E. patients and is not relevant in any way to M.E. patients. If the M.E. community were to reject all ‘CFS’ labelled research as ‘only relating to ‘CFS’ patients’ (including research which describes those abnormalities/characteristics unique to M.E. patients), however, this would seem to support the myth that ‘CFS’ is just a ‘watered down’ definition of M.E. and that M.E. and ‘CFS’ are virtually the same thing and share many characteristics.
A very small number of ‘CFS’ studies refer in part to people with M.E. but it may not always be clear which parts refer to M.E. The A warning on ‘CFS’ and ‘ME/CFS’ research and advocacy paper is recommended reading and includes a checklist to help readers assess the relevance of individual ‘CFS’ studies to M.E. (if any) and explains some of the problems with this heterogeneous and skewed research.
In future, it is essential that M.E. research again be conducted using only M.E. defined patients and using only the term M.E. The bogus, financially-motivated disease category of ‘CFS’ must be abandoned.
Our aims by Stephen Ralph, founder of MEAction UK
Wessely's Words by Stephen Ralph
The 1996 Strasbourg Convention on Biomedicine and the reform of the UK Mental Health Act: have they anything to do with the attempt to re-classify ME and CFS as mental illness in the WHO Guide to Mental Health in Primary Care? by Stephen Ralph
PRiME and the Scottish Parliament, 14th June 2005, Stephen Ralph
Information about PRiME and the Science Media Centre by Stephen Ralph, 13th June 2005
Somatization and somatoform disorders Author(s): Elena Garralda
Comment from Stephen Ralph, 3rd December 2005
PRiME - Sending Us Around in Circles by Stephen Ralph, 19th June 2005
Ellen Goudsmit PhD and the "London" criteria : THE FACTS by Margaret Williams
Why is this Important? A Personal View by Stephen Ralph
Ellen's Discrepancies..... again by Stephen Ralph, 21st May 2005
A Call for Help from the ME community by Stephen Ralph, 2nd March 2005
My Question to Professor Colin Blakemore CEO of the Medical Research Council on the BBC Radio Five Live Simon Mayo Programme by Stephen Ralph, 22nd February 2005
The dangerous dominance of Psychiatry in ME/CFS by Stephen Ralph, 13th September 2004
FACTS about the "London" Criteria by Stephen Ralph, 6th September 2004
Notes on recent research in ME/ICD-CFS and the Government’s policy of denial by Stephen Ralph, September 2003
During August and early September 2003, Stephen Ladyman MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Health / Community Care in the UK Labour Government of Mr Blair, has been busy responding to letters about what he refers to as "CFS/ME".
Notes on the involvement of Wessely et al with the Insurance Industry and how they deal with ME/CFS claims by Stephen Ralph, June 2003
For more articles by Stephen Ralph (and many other excellent articles on M.E.) see the Further Articles section on the MEAction UK website.