Dear Sir,
In their recent editorial on fatigue, Newton and Jones [1] comment that ‘the majority of primary care physicians believe that fatigue arises as a consequence of psychological rather than physical factors’ and imply that this may lead physicians to ‘fail before they begin’. They also go on to discuss a biological approach to the investigation and treatment of fatigue, highlighting the need to consider fatigue as ‘real’. While we agree with the need to consider biological processes in fatigued individuals, we contest that any approach that dichotomises the mind and body by focusing exclusively on either the biological or psychosocial aspects of fatigue ignores the current evidence base and is likely to be sub-optimal. We also strongly refute any suggestion that psychological disorders are any less ‘real’ than somatic conditions.
You can read the rest of this comment here: http://occmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/60/8/665.long
Comment on: Making sense of fatigue. [Occup Med (Lond). 2010]
Source: Harvey SB, Mykletun A, Wessely S. Making sense of fatigue: the need for a balanced approach. Occup Med (Lond). 2010 Dec;60(8):665-6; author reply 666-7. doi: 10.1093/occmed/kqq166. http://occmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/60/8/665.long (Full article)