What makes something real? I really want to know (no pun intended). I recently got into an argument about what makes an illness a real illness. So many illnesses start off as being attributed to stress – e.g. lupus, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, ulcers, migraines. If an ailment is not properly understood, it seems to be brushed aside as yet another consequence of stress. Patients are told to buck up and get over it; think positively and carry on. Just because medical technology has not gotten to the point where it can detect an illness does not make it psychosomatic, a figment of their hypochondriac imagination, or (my favorite) depression. Nowadays it is accepted that MS is a real disease. We would never dream of telling a MS patient that they would feel better if they just got out more, or exercised more, or thought more positively. We wouldn’t call someone in the midst of a migraine lazy for needing to lie down in a quiet, dark room to rest. Fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome both have a large body of scientific, peer-reviewed research behind it. So why do people, including doctors, continue to still insist they are not real? Just because there is not single test to detect either disease, just because there isn’t a cure doesn’t mean these are not real diseases.
The person I was arguing with pointed out that you can find a study to prove anything, that often current research will negate research that is 10 or 20+ years old. That is true to a certain degree. There is a lot of flawed research out there. This is why research is not acceptable until it has been peer-reviewed and replicated. The scientific method states that in order for an observation to be valid, it must be replicable. Also, people will erroneously believe that an earlier study has been disproved (I am talking about medications and supplements here) when abuse of said substance results in different results. Of course the end result with be different if abuse occurs. Duh! Case in point: way back in the 1990s, creatine was considered a wonderful supplement for bodybuilders to take. Now the media treats it like a pariah. Why? Because a bunch of baseball players, among others, abused it to get astronomical results. That doesn’t mean it is a bad supplement to take. Taken in moderation or when a person has a deficiency in it can have wonderful results. Bottom line is when research is peer-reviewed and replicable, it can be trusted as fact. If we doubt ALL research, science will come to a standstill.