---

The Brussels version of the CFS name-change debate was more focused and, in this observer's view, much more useful than its Boston counterpart of October 1998. Scientists participated in the Brussels session, and the attendees were more focused on the specifics of what new name may be most appropriate.

The highlight of the session was a joint proposal by Anna-Louise Midsem, currently Vice-President of the European M.E. Associations Alliance, and Ellen Piro, President of the Norwegian M.E. Association. They noted that contrary to popular belief, M.E. and CFS were not the same entity (see the separate article above titled "What is M.E.?"). Midsem and Piro then specifically proposed that CFS be re-named to indicate that it is an atypical or incomplete form of M.E.

This is an important proposal. It addresses a major challenge that there has been in the recent debate on the name-change. Many people in the American CFS community have been assuming -- as I have for many years -- that CFS and M.E. were the same entity, and many have therefore concluded that a major alternative to "CFS" would be to simply change it to M.E.

However, during the recent joint-panel project on the name-change which I spearheaded earlier this year (which has now been suspended in deference to the American government's current name-change program), I discovered that many European scientists and M.E. advocates were quite alarmed that CFS might be re-named to M.E. They felt that M.E. was well-established as a physical disease (at the least on the books of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases), while CFS as defined by the CDC was in good part a psychiatric condition, in their view. These Europeans were deeply concerned that if CFS were to appropriate the name of M.E., then the modest ship of M.E. legitimacy would be sunk by being boarded by the giant American/psychiatric entity of chronic fatigue syndrome.

But the Scandinavian proposal would reverse this scenario. The legitimacy that M.E. has would be lent to the CFS entity should such a proposal be adopted. It will be important for the American government's name-change program to give this proposal serious consideration.

---