Is fibromyalgia real by the strict definition of a disease? That's the question that was debated last month at the American College or Rheumatology. An interesting discussion was had about whether strict scientific method should be embraced or whether fibromylagia was an example of a pathoplastic condition.
He spent much of his allotted time discussing the phenomenon of how the label we attach to a disease or condition, and how our perception of that disease, changes over time. This mutability of language and perception, and the need that patients and clinicians have to give a name to the cause of illness or distress, what Russell referred to as pathoplasticity, has led to a whole host of loose collections of commonly experienced symptoms to be elevated to the status of disease.
I bet you're wondering what I think. Is fibromyalgia real? I think fibromylagia is all in your head.
