Monday, 6 August 2012

I definitely wouldn't start from here.

I'm trying to do a little more by way of understanding my condition: its origins, nature, management and treatment.

Hmm.  I might have picked something a bit more straightforward. Especially since the CFS itself has markedly reduced the ability I used to have, to tear into research with enthusiasm teamed with a voracious reading habit and an analytical mind.
This has to be tackled at an entirely different pace.
That for one thing.

And then there is the consensus of medical opinion.
Or rather, then there isn't.
Apart from the authorities being tentative, conservative and cautious
(but understandably in consequence not giving those of afflicted the clearest of pictures or guidelines), there are those with firmer, more definite opinions firmly holding that the key issue is psychological, psychosomatic.  And those who maintain entirely different paradigms, some of them pointing to particular chemical processes or cellular anomalies.

Describe these, weigh them, decide between them?
I've only just arrived in this country: I'm a long, long way from mapping it, and through that discovering the best trail for a pilgrim.

I have, however, already discovered numerous brightly-lit signs saying "This way".  Unfortunately they do tend to point in diverse directions, and are often high-charging toll-roads.

This at least is relatively familiar.  I've met it in another country, where various understandings, and interventions and treatments and cures have been proposed for autism.
It's not so long since "childhood trauma" or bad "parenting" were mainstream medical explanations for autisms nature and origins.

No, it's not just a matter of trusting the man (or woman) in the white coat.  They can be drastically wrong from time to time, too.

This could take a while.

No comments:

Post a Comment