Friday, April 8, 2011

NIH Workshop on ME/CFS: State of the Knowledge?

Bottom line: It's abysmal.

I missed yesterday, but watched the NIH webcast today and those YouTube vids from yesterday that Vikki Walker posted (bless her). I am so upset that I'm starting a blog rather than posting on the forums I frequent or tweeting my outrage, which are my normal means of self-expression. I'll go later into who I am and why I'm following and blogging on this topic. But, for now, I want to talk about what I saw and heard today.

Overall, the "knowledge gaps" re: ME aren't gaps. They are gaping chasms. To sum up the "state of knowledge" from yesterday and today:
  • It's a horrible, multi-systemic disease. You can't name a bodily system that's not dysfunctional in some way in those afflicted;
  • Afflicted people are much, much sicker than the research and medical establishments have even begun to recognize;
  • No-one agrees on who has it;
  • No-one agrees on what causes it;
  • No-one knows how to assess whether any treatment approach works - let alone for whom, for how many, or how much;
  • There is no agreement on paths forward or priorities; and
  • There's no government funding available to do the research necessary to answer any of these questions anyway.
Kudos to Dennis Mangan and the patient reps, among which I don't include the CAA, for holding a workshop to publicly and undeniably demonstrate that the US government medical research establishment has made no progress on any of these issues over the past 30 years. What else can one say in response to these past 2 days other than "Shame on the NIH and the CDC?"

I'm a WPI fan and, once again, Judy Mikovits demonstrated her head-and-shoulders-above brilliance at the meeting. And, once again, she was cut short, interrupted, ignored and publicly admonished. I am so tired of having the one person with immediately useful research and clear ideas of what needs to happen next being stifled! But anyone who has been following events over the past 2.5 years knew this conference wouldn't result in funding for the WPI anyway.

The one useful insight provided by any of the government speakers (other than Harvey Alter, who is useful just by showing up and breathing) that I saw in the past 2 days was the point made by the woman from AHRQ? AHQR? I'm not sure of her workgroup's name (will certainly find it again), but she is the one with the history in Congress. Her point was one we already know, but can't be repeated often enough: Funding for research on ME and a research agenda that makes sense is solely a matter of POLITICAL WILL. All funding for government-sponsored research comes from Congress. Congress can intervene and set research priorities, down to the level of specifying research topics, as they did in the late 80's and early 90's, although it was undercut and diverted by the CDC. Not insisting on hearings about the CDC diversion of funds is where the CAA most severely failed us after Hillary exposed it. And the CAA has continued to severely fail us by being unable to generate any further political will in the 20 years since then! The reality is what Roy and other experienced advocates have been saying, again and again: Where we most need to focus our efforts as US patients and advocates is on Congress. We need new, healthy-enough patients, like Mary now that she's back on ampligen, and patient advocates, like Chris, to be walking those halls, rather than Kim.

So, it will be interesting to see what Suzanne Vernon writes up about this workshop. It's more interesting that Suzanne has the write-up job. It was even more interesting a few weeks ago when I spoke with Maldarelli at NCI, who perceives that the CAA is the patient advocacy organization that best represents us. Obviously, no-one at NIH or anywhere in the government understands that the CAA exists only because of a very few, very wealthy donors now, rather than a widespread, grassroots, general level of patient support. Maldarelli actually stated he believes the CAA is THE organization that represents the patient community, and certainly nothing that occurred at this workshop would disabuse him or other feds of that notion. There is LOTS of work to be done with NIH on that issue, let alone the huge amount of work we need to do on Congress. And, whatever Vernon writes up, we can be sure it won't support the appropriate level of research into HGRV research going forward.

I'm distraught. I'm confused. I don't know where best to put my energies.,,

Val





14 comments:

  1. Val, your last sentence really sums things up for me. Where can I put my energies?

    My energies are so small. I had plans of action and couldn't follow through, as my energy was less than I planned for.

    And I know we're all in the same state: longing to make a difference, but on such a tight energy budget, what can any one of us do that doesn't waste our energy?

    The only thing I know for sure makes an immediate difference is the energy we spend giving some moral support to one another. Goodness knows nobody else does that.

    So with that, thanks for blogging. I'm your first Follower, and glad to have found one more voice to hear and share, and one more set of thoughts to consider, as we slog along.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks, Val. I always ready to hear what you have to say. You've got another follower:)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Val, I'm looking forward to your blogs!

    I have difficulty reading white letters on a black background though, would you consider switching or changing colours?

    Follower # 3 :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Welcome to blog world, Val, maybe you can join the blog ring, after 5 posts I think!

    ReplyDelete
  5. You've made a great start on blogging, Val!

    My suggestion about where to put your energies would be to focus on finding ways to stop the CAA from being considered the spokesperson for people with M.E. and getting research money for WPI.

    You've got another follower.

    Patricia Carter

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm glad you started blogging too Val! Great start and yes, Shame on Them!

    Big thanks and respect to everyone who blogs for our cause!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Congrats Val on diving into the blog world. You have expressed sentiments that many of us feel.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You nailed the situation Val. We need a new patient advocacy org or movement badly. The WPI and the disease need a massive amount of funding and we need to start targeting congress and protesting in the street if able.
    Keith

    ReplyDelete
  9. The CAA will remain the de facto patient organization until there is an alternative organization. We must create one. Even if it is just a website and a list of supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks Val. I appreciate your insights and focus. Good blog.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I believe most people are on Facebook now. Would it be possible to create a group or use an exisiting one to focus solely on discussing advocacy efforts?

    ReplyDelete
  12. We have an NIH ME/CFS workshop. Which is? We talk about "this disease" or "our disease." Which one? ME? CFS? ME/CFS? CFS/ME? Which is? The "patient advocates" appointed for us do not seem to know or care.

    Lenny Jason spelled it out, we must take heed, not ignore it or try to take shortcuts.

    The stories and testimonies are nearly identical and have been for decades. Everyone seems to listen and care and vows to take "it" seriously. Then we proclaim that the log jam has been broken (or some such pronouncement) and sell it to everyone who wants to believe....

    ME/CFS is the next round of nonsense to bury ME under the CFS rubble, and those "selected" (Robert Miller, Mary and Pat) are from the CAA/Pandora/MCWPA "ME/CFS" crowd.

    Patients with ME need an ME diagnosis. We need to recognize ME - not as another faux name only "ME" organization or as some combination CFS hybrid term (*with NO accepted or officially recognized meaning or designation that can be further redefined or broadened...), and challenge and educate to counter those groups/advocates trying to "brand" ME/CFS as advocacy or awareness (as the CAA tried to do with CFS).

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi Val,

    Good comments. I think it's disastrous that Suzanne Vernon is the person who will synthesize the sessions and send an official workshop report "to Dr. Collins, Dr. Penn (?) and all the people who matter." (I believe that was Dr. Mangan's phrase.) Aside from Vernon's bias, if her report to Dr. Collins is anything like her report at the end of the workshop, it will put him to sleep.

    ReplyDelete