2 December 2002
By invitation—Address to Federal
Government Policy Committee of Health and Aging
Parliament House,
Canberra, Australia
Guest Speaker—Christine Hunter, on behalf
of
Alison
Hunter Memorial Foundation
ME/Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome Association of Australia
"Truth is the child
of time, not of authority" – Bertold
Brecht
The Alison Hunter Memorial Foundation was formally
established in 1998 through the initiative of the Public Interest Advocacy
Centre.
Myalgic encephalomyelitis has been formally classified by the World Health
Organisation WHO as a neurological disorder in the International Classification
of Diseases ICD since 1969. It remains classified in the current ICD 10,
G 93.3.
The shift to the name "chronic fatigue syndrome"
(CFS) invites the dismissal, contempt and medical neglect so often endured
by people with ME/CFS. The emphasis of "fatigue" (weariness)
at the expense of the cardinal neurological, gastrointestinal, cardiac
and myoarthralgic features trivialises the substantial disability of
ME.
I briefly relate our daughter Alison’s
experience of the health system to illustrate the problems faced by
the severely ill.
In the Sydney Morning
Herald News Review 4-5 May 2002, Professor James
Isbister, Head of Haematology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney,
described our daughter as "a brilliant girl, intellectually very
vibrant". He continued "to be honest I felt helpless towards the end.
On many occasions I was extremely embarrassed about the way she was
treated by the system. A lot of terrible things Alison went through
were doctors projecting their own fears and inadequacies. How anyone
could not think she had a major medical illness is beyond me". Alison,
he said was "like someone going through a concentration camp, suffering
terrible physical distress compounded by insults and inhumanity."
Professor Isbister lamented "the edifice of medicine that cannot
acknowledge things it does not understand". Six years after her
death, those words were the first frank admission of Alison’s cruel
treatment by the health system. Such honesty may have provided some
small comfort to her during her life.
In 1986 at the age of nine, Alison contracted
a "severe virus" with
encephalitic features. Six months later, with little sustainable improvement,
she was given the diagnosis of postviral syndrome. A name with no treatment,
no prognosis. Overriding the myriad of her symptoms was a punishing intractable
headache. Alison’s suffering tormented us all.
Over time, despite several lengthy episodes
of remission, any further infection led to serious relapse. At the onset
Alison was often reminded by eminent experts we consulted that it was
her misfortune to have something so poorly understood because "in ten years we will have all the
answers." Ten years later Alison’s condition was critical.
And still there were no answers. Although treatment with chemotherapy
in the last weeks of her life eased the throat ulcerations which had
plagued her for the previous two years, Alison died in March 1996.
US author Laura Hillenbrand articulated the common experience of those
with severe ME, which she contracted from food poisoning.
"I lost 22 pounds in the first month – I
lost all my vitality. My hair started falling out. I got sores all
over my mouth and throat. I was running fevers all the time. I’ve
spent 6 of the last 14 years completely bedridden. For many hours a
day I can’t move my arms or legs. I can’t sit
up, get myself to the bathroom. I can’t talk to anyone. All I can
do is move my eyeballs. I lie there and hope I can keep breathing."
Such severe ME does not discriminate.
The accounts of young people who share Hillenbrand’s
experience of ME can defy belief.
When faced with severe cases, doctors search
for psychiatric labels such as pervasive refusal syndrome, Munchausen’s syndrome by proxy, conversion
or somatisation disorder, or abnormal illness behaviour. Enforced exercise
and punitive behavioural regimes draw families into dispute with hospital
staff. In the worst cases young people have been removed from the care
of their parents by the courts, and confined to psychiatric units or placed
in foster care. Paediatrician Dr Nigel Speight, a member of the UK Chief
Medical Officer’s (CMO) Reference Group for ME refers to the mistreatment
of these severely affected young people as "child abuse by health
professionals".
In Australia this abuse is well illustrated by the cruel treatment forced
upon K aged 13.
Despite a confirmed independent diagnosis of
severe ME/CFS by a leading endocrinologist /researcher in ME/CFS, K
was detained in a locked psychiatric unit against her wishes and those
of her family. A "normalization
plan" was instigated to "create behavioural challenges to
K beliefs". "If K is continuing to complain, scream,
cry, whine etc she is to remain in the chair until she is calm. K does
not require rests. At this stage bed rest through the day will cease".
K was removed to foster care for 5 years.
Many such medical nightmares could be told of families desperate for
medical help but constrained by fear. A study documenting family experiences
of the health system has commenced at the University of Western Sydney.
What has been done for people with ME/CFS in Australia?
People with ME/CFS have been shamefully neglected.
For the past decade initiatives to bring consensus
and appropriate care to people with ME/CFS have failed through inaction,
denial and misattributions.
The medical politics are truly awful. One struggles to find another illness
where those responsible for care in so many instances display such arrogant
disregard, spite and cruelty towards the patients.
The history of the sparse initiatives towards ME/CFS
speaks volumes.
| 1993 |
The "Watson" Chronic Fatigue
Syndrome Review, instigated by the then Federal Health Minister
recommended a national consensus conference of key agencies,
researchers, clinicians and representative consumers.
This recommendation was ignored by the Liberal Government. |
| 1994 |
The Royal Australasian College of Physicians
RACP and the Royal Australian College of General Practice (RACGP)
surveys of members revealed "significant areas of ignorance,
misconceptions and prejudice". |
| 1995 |
The RACP proposed the development of
clinical practice guidelines for CFS. |
| 1996 |
The Commonwealth Department of Health
and Aged Care (Medicare Branch) provided an initial grant of
$130,000 (later extended to $200,000) to the RACP. The RACP committed
to following procedures outlined in the National Health and Medical
Research Council NHMRC Guidelines for the Development and Implementation
of Clinical Practice Guidelines. |
| 1998 |
Due date for the release of CFS Clinical
Guidelines was May 1998. |
| 2002 |
The CFS Clinical Guidelines were published
four years late in May 2002. |
The Guidelines were strenuously rejected by all state
consumer societies and the ME Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Association
of Australia. Many Australian and international researchers and clinicians
voiced concerns about the bias of the document.
Key consumer objections were:
- the failure to accurately represent the spectrum of the illness
- the undue emphasis given to recommendations
for cognitive behavioural therapy
- graded exercise based on unreliable
evidence – short
term studies of poorly defined patient populations
- the biased selectivity
and inconsistency in the use of evidence
- the failure to incorporate
the key consumer concerns
- the insidious psychiatric bias, which
could not be masked by
the superficial expressions of empathy
The Guidelines process did not conform to NHMRC Guidelines and NHMRC
accreditation did not proceed.
Inexcusably the RACP Guidelines Working Group failed
to address the severely affected, admitting "they have not been included
because they have never been studied".
The NHMRC has provided the following details of research funding for
CFS
| 1992 |
$213,000 over 3 years |
Chief Investigator- Ian Hickie |
| |
Study Title "Is neurasthenia
(chronic fatigue) prevalent in Primary Care" |
| 1994 |
$270,740 |
Chief Investigator- Ian Hickie |
| |
Study Title "The genetic
aetiology of chronic fatigue and related disorders" |
| 2001 |
$500,000 over 5 years |
Chief Investigator- Ian Hickie |
| |
Study Title "A prospective
study of the psychiatric and medical Characteristics of post-infectious
fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome" |
| 2001 |
$360,000 over 3 years |
Chief Investigator- Andrew
Lloyd |
| |
Study title "Microbiological
and immunological determinants of prolonged illness following
Q fever" |
It should be noted that the 1992 and 1994 studies
relate to chronic fatigue, NOT chronic fatigue syndrome. The NHMRC has
failed to distinguish chronic fatigue from chronic fatigue syndrome both
in correspondence and advice to the Health Minister (Hansard 10.9.96).
Does the NHMRC not differentiate between chronic
fatigue and the neurological disease ME/CFS which has defined CDC diagnostic
criteria?
People with ME/CFS are held hostage to research which
blurs terminology (chronic fatigue, chronic fatigue syndrome, medically
unexplained physical symptoms, prolonged fatigue syndromes), uses broadly
defined patient populations, confers causality to associations (prolonged
illness is maintained by a strongly held belief in the physical nature
of the illness) and draws biased interpretations (a greater number of
symptoms, experienced more severely suggests somatoform disorder).
The current fairly amorphous definitions of
ME/CFS lead to research outcomes which are unreliable. Scientifically
rigorous research of tight subject cohorts defined by detailed history
and the particular symptoms to be examined would more reliably progress
medical knowledge to assist people with ME/CFS.
The NHMRC Strategic Research Development
Committee SRDC has stated it "would encourage the development of
a consensus around a research definition of CFS in Australia with clear
and justifiable inclusion/exclusion criteria and subgrouping categories."
Until this is done, ME/CFS will not be considered by the SRDC for targeted
funding.
The biological basis of ME/CFS can
no longer be ignored. There is now considerable pathophysiological
evidence which
includes dysregulation of antiviral pathways, altered brain perfusion,
orthostatic intolerance, oxidative stress, and endothelial dysregulation.
See http://www.meresearch.org.uk.
We need an urgent Forum of researchers, clinicians,
health authorities and key consumer representatives to examine the
barriers to clinical care and strategic research development funding
for ME/CFS.