Page last updated at 12:36 GMT, Wednesday, 11 February 2009

ME pair appeal ‘unfair NHS rules’

fatigue
There is some degree of controversy over how ME should be treated

Two ME patients are launching a High Court appeal against what they say is an "unfair and irrational" approach by the NHS to their condition.

The judicial review is being brought by Kevin Short, from Norwich, and London-based Douglas Fraser.

They argue the NHS was wrong to place so much emphasis on psychological rather than medical therapies.

But the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence said its August 2007 guidance was "robust"

There is little evidence that what has been recommended actually works
Jamie Beagent, patients' solicitor
The guidance issued in August 2007 related to ME and chronic fatigue syndrome, which affect over 200,000 across the country.

Experts are divided over the severity and best way to treat the conditions - and whether they are indeed two separate illnesses.

NICE recommended cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), a form of counselling, and planned activity programme known as graded exercise therapy (GET) as front-line treatments.

But the two men will tell the High Court that such therapies can actually be harmful to people with ME in particular.

They believe there should have been more emphasis placed on drug treatments, arguing ME can lead to cardio-vascular problems and severe joint pain.

The court was packed with other ME sufferers, many of them confined to wheelchairs, as the case opened.

Barrister Jeremy Hyam, representing both men, told the court that while the claim was being brought by just two individuals, their views were shared "across the ME community".

"Literally thousands of sufferers have communicated their support for this challenge," he said.

Ignored treatments

The guidance does call for standard drugs to be used to combat some symptoms, but the campaigners said it ignored anti-viral treatments that could stem the development of problems in the first place.

Solicitor Jamie Beagent, who is representing the pair, said: "There were two key flaws in the decision.

"Firstly, the people who assessed the guidance were weighted in favour of psychological treatments and, secondly, it was irrational and unfair.

"There is little evidence that what has been recommended actually works. NICE has virtually ruled out medical intervention and that is wrong."

The two ME patients have received the backing of the ME Association with a spokesman calling the guidance "unfit for purpose".

But NICE chief executive Andrew Dillon defended the guidance, saying it was "robust" and had been designed to improve care.

"The group considered a range of complex issue in great depth taking full account of the views of patient groups and health professionals."

And he added the court case was "diverting resources away" from NICE's core work.

The hearing is expected to last two days and the guidance will remain in place until the judge gives his verdict.

Print Sponsor


SEE ALSO
Myalgic encephalomyelitis
24 Oct 08 |  Health

RELATED INTERNET LINKS
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites


FEATURES, VIEWS, ANALYSIS
Has China's housing bubble burst?
How the world's oldest clove tree defied an empire
Why Royal Ballet principal Sergei Polunin quit

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

Copyright © 2020 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.

Americas Africa Europe Middle East South Asia Asia Pacific