No amount of stress in history is known to cause CFS

[Guest guest]

FORWARDING

 

  Erik Johnson <erikmoldwarrior                       

No amount of stress in history is known to cause CFS

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

Humans have often experienced harsh conditions which have provided us

innumerable instances in which emotional factors and prolonged stress, if they

had

the capacity to induce CFS, consistently failed to do so.

 

History also teaches us that concepts of psychological causality have been

reliably and fervently brought to bear upon every " unexplained illness " that

ever emerged, and that despite massive amounts of exclusionary evidence, such

theories are regretfully discarded with the greatest reluctance by their

proponents only after a firm scientific identification of medical etiology

has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

 

The manner in which CFS strikes down people who were under no undue or

apparent negative emotional stimulus raised a slight predicament for stress

theorists, which was cunningly countered by simply redefining and reassessing

" stress "

as virtually anything physical or emotional that perturbs immune function in

any measurable way.

 

Under this new extended meaning, one can no longer claim to have experienced

no abnormal levels of stress that might have been responsible for the illness,

as " Everyone is under stress " .    In fact, there is almost nothing that

cannot be defined as " stress " anymore.

 

In an adroit " Bait and Switch " worthy of a used care salesman, the proponents

of stress causality use their extended definition to insinuate " stress of all

types " into the list of possible contributory factors, then present a " bill

of goods " which is strangely bereft of anything other than the emotional

factors

which they wish to emphasize:  Factors which are now said to be completely

independent of the external severity which people formerly attached to them. 

 

The old notion of implicating situations as stressful if they consisted of

excessive or extreme emotional stimulus are completely abandoned as irrelevant

and meaningless.    

 

If, as it is often claimed, that this this reassessment and redefinition of

stress is an objectively scientific improved explanation of the phenomenon,

equally applicable to any condition or illness, then is it not peculiar that the

vehement

assertions of its importance are not made to sufferers of other diseases?

 

Wouldn't such discriminatory application of the concept be extremely

revealing as to how CFS is really being viewed?

  

Can one accuse CFS sufferers of unfairly going ballistic when stress or mood

disorders are so prejudicially implicated for this illness, while so neglected

for others?

 

-Erik Johnson

 

Send an Email for free membership

~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~

      >>>> Help ME Circle  <<<<

>>>>       20 June 2007        <<<<

Editorship : j.van.roijen

Outgoing mail scanned by Norton AV