26. januar 2004 Public Announcement Required - WHO Collaborating Centre, London The statement issued on 24 January 2004 by the World Health Organisation headquarters in Geneva is a gigantic step forward for the ME/CFS Community UK and has massive consequences. Andre l'Hours from the WHO Geneva Headquarters has confirmed that the ICD classifications (for ME/CFS) are approved by the World Health Assembly and therefore take legal precedence over *unapproved modifications* made by a WHO Collaborating Centre. The Collaborating Centre that has made these unapproved modifications is based at King's College UK. Home of Professor Wessely and the psychiatric lobby. ME/CFS are both classified by the WHO Headquarters in Geneva as diseases of the central nervous system and not under mental and behavioural disorders as has been incorrectly stated and promulgated by WHO Collaborating Centre, King's College UK. The WHO Collaborating Centre, King's College UK has been purposely giving out misinformation on the classification of the organic illnesses ME/CFS throughout the United Kingdom. This is a serious error that has had devastating consequences on the lives of all ME/CFS sufferers in the UK. We note that in the House of Lords debate that took place on 22 January 2004, the Health Minister Lord Warton stated: "The current version, ICD-10, classifies CFS in two places: as neurasthenia in the mental health chapter, F48.0; and also as myalgic encephalomyelitis in the neurology chapter, G93.3. The diagnostic criteria used in the ICD shows that the WHO has essentially put the same condition in both places. That is the WHO's formal position". The Lord Warner has been shown to be incorrect. (Hansard) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds04/ text/40122\ -12.htm#40122-12_unstar0 Just precisely how did it come to pass that the Noble Lord Warner was so comprehensively and incorrectly briefed for this debate we wonder? And for how long has this gone on? In light of thIS statement from the World Health Organisation Headquarters Geneva, we call: For the WHO Collaborating Centre UK to issue a high profile public statement announcing that the information that they have been providing regarding ME/CFS nationwide is incorrect. For the WHO Collaborating Centre UK to issue this statement to all media both medical and lay. For a statement to be issued in this regard to the Department of Health, General Practioners nationwide, Primary Care Trusts, NHS Trusts, Medical Agencies, the Benefits Agency, Social Services et al. For a recall/revision/erratum slip/amendment to be issued to correct all literature disseminated - both medical and lay - that gives the incorrect WHO Classification for ME/CFS. That all websites that carry this incorrect information be modified. That every Charity Magazine in the UK carries this statement. Thank you. Jane Bryant http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/THEONECLICKPROTEST/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESS RELEASE Classification Principles provided by the World Health Organisation re ME/CFS On 28th June 2001 Andre L'Hours, the Technical Officer at the WHO headquarters in Geneva who is responsible for the ICD, confirmed that it was "unacceptable" if the same disorder had been included in two places in the ICD-10 and that the same disorder could not be differently categorised under the one WHO banner. When he was informed of what was happening in the UK, he promised to look into the matter. Andre l'Hours confirmed that the ICD classifications are approved by the World Health Assembly and therefore take legal precedence over unapproved modifications made by a WHO Collaborating Centre. On 16th October 2001, Dr B Saraceno from the WHO provided the following clarification in writing: "I wish to clarify the situation regarding the classification of neurasthenia, fatigue syndrome, post-viral fatigue syndrome and benign myalgic encephalomyelitis. Let me state clearly that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has not changed its position on these disorders since the publication of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition in 1992 and versions of it during later years. "Post-viral fatigue syndrome remains under the diseases of nervous system as G93.3. Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis is included within this category. "Neurasthenia remains under mental and behavioural disorders as F48.0 and fatigue syndrome (note: not THE CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME) is included within this category. However, post-viral fatigue syndrome is explicitly excluded from F48.0. "The WHO ICD-10 Diagnostic and Management Guidelines for Mental Disorders in Primary Care, 1996, includes fatigue syndrome under neurasthenia (F48.0) but does not state or imply that conditions belonging to G93.3 should be included here. "I would also like to state that the WHO's position concerning this is reflected in its publications and electronic material, including websites. "It is possible that one of the several WHO Collaborating Centres in the United Kingdom presented a view that is at variance with WHO's position. "Collaborating Centres are not obliged to seek approval from WHO for the material they publish. I understand that the Collaborating Centre concerned has now made changes to the information on their website after speaking with WHO". In the debate on ME/CFS in the House of Lords on 22nd January 2004, the Health Minister (Lord Warner) stated: "The current version, ICD-10, classifies CFS in two places: as neurasthenia in the mental health chapter, F48.0; and also as myalgic encephalomyelitis in the neurology chapter, G93.3. The diagnostic criteria used in the ICD shows that the WHO has essentially put the same condition in both places. That is the WHO's formal position". Following his speech (recorded in Hansard at column 1195), a copy of this letter was given to the Health Minister by the Countess of Mar; Lord Warner said that he would take it to the Chief Medical Officer to be discussed. On 23rd January 2004, Andre l'Hours from the WHO headquarters provided the following clarification (in writing): "This is to confirm that according to the taxonomic principles governing the Tenth Revision of the World Health Organization's International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10), it is not permitted for the same condition to be classified to more than one rubric as this would mean that the individual categories and subcategories were no longer mutually exclusive". Andre l'Hours also stated that if a country accepts the WHO Regulations concerning nomenclature (which the UK does), then that country is obliged to accept the ICD classification. For the avoidance of doubt, the UK has registered no reservations about the ICD-10 and therefore formally accepts it. Margaret Williams.