Talk:Graded exercise therapy

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Balance

I've edited this because of balance issues. Because GET falls within the general controversy relating to CFS and Simon Wessely I'm laying out precisely the changes I've made and the reasons for them.

1) The article stated 'all' medical organisations supported GET, but cited only two. I'm certain it's likely more than two, but with a prominent patient group standing opposed 'All' is unduly assertive.

2) The opposition of the ME Association was written off as 'some within the community', when the 'some' is one of the most prominent patient groups, and the article is already being overly assertive in favour of the opposing view, that becomes problematic for balance. Making it plain the opposition is from the ME Association should address that.

3) The opposition is said to be 'because patients said it didn't work' which if you check the linked document is a gross misrepresentation of the ME Association's position, which states that 33-50% of patients suffered adverse effects. Not 'it didn't work', but that people were actively harmed by GET.

Whichever position you take on the effectiveness of GET, the article should accurately report the strength of the pro and con positions, and report the reasons for those positions accurately. 82.24.122.84 (talk) 19:49, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've made further slight changes to the existing wording (previous to the above changes), in an attempt to convey the controversy in more neutral language, and for clarification. Chelseawoman1 (talk) 07:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CDC and GET

"Research has shown that gradual, guided physical activity can be helpful (although not a cure) for those with CFS/ME.[1]" The CDC has removed references to GET from it's website, yet this page still reference that site to support the quoted sentence in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.6.238.242 (talk) 00:46, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it needs updating. Feel free to update it if you have the time. Perhaps medscape would be a better reference. Also, I don't think it's correct to say that GET avoids the push-crash cycle. That is what pacing is for. (Not sure what the CDC page said, but we can't use it any more anyway). --sciencewatcher (talk) 20:41, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect/outdated reference ?

Hi, I'm a patient and not a doctor meaning I'm not in a position to edit any medical related articles but I hope someone qualified enough will see this and will be able to correct it.

The first reference of this article is to NHS site - but the page you get redirected to says "exercise programmes such as graded exercise therapy (GET) are no longer recommended for everyone with ME/CFS".

Also, I found in the UK NICE guidelines published in the October 2021 that GET should not be used to treat ME/CFS. See https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206/chapter/Recommendations, point 1.11.14 bullet 3 and also box 4 that follows right after it.

I hope someone can correct this page because as of now it seems to be rather misleading given the latest UK NHS and NICE official positions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.0.70.145 (talk) 05:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GET and long Covid

I've heard that GET is being used or researched in long Covid but can't find any academic/secondary sources to back this up. I would like to cover this so good sources are requested. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Graded exercise therapy is used for more than CFS/ME

Whoever wrote this must be aware the graded exercise therapy is not only used to treat CFS/ME? CFS/ME is a diagnosis while chronic fatigue is a symptom associated with many diseases and disorders. For example, POTS/dysautonmia patients often experience symptoms of chronic fatigue. Yet there is plenty of clinical evidence that graded exercise therapy can improve system and in some instances result in patients fully recovering based on the tilt table test, which is the gold standard for diagnosing POTS. I recognize that GET is controversial in the treatment of CFS, but as this article is written patients with chronic fatigue not related CFS/ME might think graded exercise therapy should be avoided. I have seen adrenal insufficiency patients with chronic fatigue, that have refused graded exercise therapy because of posts on the web that fail to clearly state that they are referring to the response of CFS/ME patients to graded exercise therapy. RonBook (talk) 01:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The term graded exercise therapy seems to be used almost exclusively for a form of exercise therapy used on people with PEM from ME/CFS or long Covid, and similar therapies for other conditions seem to be just called physical therapy. The great majority of literature on GET is for ME/CFS. If you have good sources on GET in other conditions, feel free to add information from them or post them here. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 03:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]