Debates at ECED meetings 1989 - 2013
Oslo 2013
13th General Meeting of the European Council on Eating Disorders (ECED)
www.ecedoslo2013.net
To be determined
Florence 2011
Debate No 1: "As health care professinals we have the duty to campaign against pro-eating disorders websites."
Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Sandra Sassaroli (Italy)
Eric van Furth (Netherlands)
David Clinton (Sweden)
Debate No 2: "Full recovery is a false treatment promise for adults with a chronic eating disorders."
Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Søren Nielsen (Denmark)
Erika Toman (Switzerland)
Geoffrey Buckett (Australia)
London 2009
Debate No 1: “This house believes we should invest much more of our limited resources into preventing eating disorders”
Chair:
Pro:
Con:

J Hubert Lacey (London, UK)
Runi Børresen (Oslo, N)
Eric van Furth (Leidschendam, NL)
Kristine Dietz Godt (DK)

Debate No 2: “This house believes that information-sharing and carer involvement in the  treatment of severe eating disorders should take precedence over confidentiality”
Chair:
Pro:
Con:

Günther Rathner (Innsbruck, A)
Susan Ringwood (London, UK)
Bridget Dolan (London, UK)
Erika Toman (Zurich, CH)

Porto 2007
Debate No 1: "The fashion industry has a great responsibility in the development of eating disorders."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (London, UK)
Greta Noordenbos (Leiden, NL)
Cynthia M. Bulik (Chapel Hill, USA)
Debate No 2: "Randomized treatment trials in anorexia nervosa are a waste of time."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Hana Papežová (Prague CZ)
Finn Skårderud (Oslo, N)
David Clinton (Stockholm, S)
Debate No 3: "A focus on weight or BMI undermines the treatment of eating disorders."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Daniel Sampaio (Porto, P)
Bryan Lask (London, UK)
Riccardo Dalle Grave (Verona, I)
Innsbruck 2005
Debate No 1: "The treatment of AN has no impact on the natural history of the disorder."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (London, UK)
Cynthia M. Bulik (Chapel Hill, USA)
Fernando Fernández-Aranda (Barcelona, Spain)
Debate No 2: "Manualized treatments are to good therapy what cheap ready to wear clothes are to made-to-measure clothes."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Eric F. van Furth (Leidschendam, NL)
Robert Palmer (Leicester, UK)
Christopher Fairburn (Oxford, UK)
Debate No 3: "DSM and ICD should include Obesity as an Eating Disorder."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Hans Wijbrand Hoek (The Hague, NL)
Anna Keski-Rahkonen (Helsinki, Finland)
Simon Gowers (Liverpool, UK)
Budapest 2003
Debate No 1: "Clinical professionals who themselves have a history of an Eating disorder are at a disadvantage when trying to treat patients with these conditions."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Alex Yellowlees (UK)
Robert Palmer (UK)
Debate No 2: "Parents are partly responsible for the development of eating disorders."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Gerald Russell (UK)
Walter Vandereycken (Belgium)
Ulf Wallin (Sweden)
Debate No 3: "DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria are a handicap to the treatment of eating disorders."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Irena Namyslowska (Poland)
Mervat Nasser (UK)
Hans W. Hoek (The Netherlands)
Barcelona 2001
Debate No 1: "In anorexia nervosa, return to normal body weight is the most important criterion of recovery."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Gerald Russell (UK)
Angela Favaro (Italy)
Johan Vanderlinden (Belgium)
Debate No 2: "When research funding is restricted, the available money should go to genetic rather than to psychosocial research in eating disorders."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Günther Rathner (Austria)
David Collier (UK)
Hans W. Hoek (The Netherlands)
Debate No 3: "If a patient with bulimia nervosa has not responded to repeated and intensive therapy over two years, only palliative treatment should be made available."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Manfred M. Fichter (Germany)
Ulrike Schmidt (UK)
Debate No 4: "The significance of body image in eating disorders."

Chairperson:
Lecturer:
Discussant:
Walter Vandereycken (Belgium)
Peter Beumont (Australia) (spoken by W. Vandereycken)
Fernando Fernández-Aranda (Spain)
Stockholm 1999
Debate No 1: "Binge Eating Disorder is a hoax aimed at the American insurance companies, and should never have been included in the DSM-IV."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Ulrike Schmidt (UK)
Martina de Zwaan (Austria)
Debate No 2: "Inpatient treatments for anorexia nervosa is usually counterproductive and should be avoided."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Walter Vandereycken (Belgium)
Ivan Eisler (UK)
Eric van Furth (The Netherlands)
Debate No 3: "The one-sided stress on Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) as the treatment of choice for bulimia nervosa has impeded the development of other effective psychotherapy methods."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Günther Rathner (Austria)
Finn Skårderud (Norway)
Glenn Waller (UK)
Padova 1997
Debate No 1: "Recovery is an impossible treatment goal in chronic anorexia nervosa." Case presentation and discussion.

Chair:
Discussants:
Ricardo Dalle Grave (Italy)
Katherine Halmi (USA.)
Eric van Furth (The Netherlands)
Debate No 2: "Bulimic patients can be differentiated according to the degree of impulsiveness."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Johan Vanderlinden (Belgium)
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Angela Favaro (Italy)
Debate No 3: "Drug therapy is the treatment of choice in bulimia nervosa."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Gerald Russell (UK)
Francesca Brambilla (Italy)
Corinna Jacobi (Germany)
Dublin 1995
Debate No 1: "Which therapies work?"

Chair:
Speakers:
Noel Walsh (Ireland)
Ivan Eisler (UK)
Martina de Zwaan (Austria)
Mary Darby (Ireland)
Debate No 2: "Compulsory treatment of eating disorders is unnecessary."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Günther Rathner (Austria)
Sarah McClusky (UK)
Debate No 3: "Studying brain function will tell us more about eating disorders than studying society."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Edward Stonehill (UK)
Brian Lask (UK)
Runi Børreson (Norway)
Praha 1993
Debate No 1: "Psychotherapy with a starving patient is impossible without weight gain."

Chair:
Speakers:
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Peter J.V. Beumont (AUS)
Ricardo Dalle Grave (Italy)
Christopher Dare (UK)
Johan Vanderlinden (Belgium)
Debate No 2: "Gull and Lasegue were right: we need to separate the patient from the parents."

Chair:
Speakers:
Irena Namyslowska (Poland)
Josefina Castro Fornieles (Spain)
Phillippe. Jeammet (France)
Paul Robinson (UK)
Eric van Furth (The Netherlands)
Debate No 3: "Primary prevention is impossible and secondary prevention is a waste of time."

Chair:
Speakers:
Walter Vandereycken (Belgium)
Charlotte Buhl (Norway)
Ivan Eisler (UK)
Hans W. Hoek (The Netherlands)
Peter Slade (UK)
Debate No 4: "Same problems - different countries?"

Chair:
Speakers:
Bridget Dolan (UK)
Manfred Fichter (Germany)
Dubravka Kocijan-Hercigonja (Croatia)
Günther Rathner (Austria)
Hans-Christoph Steinhausen (Switzerland)
Ferenc Túry (Hungary)
Leuven 1991
Debate No 1: "In-patient versus out-patient treatment."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Janet Treasure (UK)
Rolf Meermann (Germany)
Jan Norré (Belgium)
Debate No 2: "Drug treatment versus psychotherapy"

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Guido Pieters (Belgium)
Peter J.V.Beumont (Australia)
Peter J. Cooper (UK)
Debate No 3: "Sexual problems - cause or consequence."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Bridget Dolan (UK)
Ellie van Vreckem (Belgium)
Glenn Waller (UK)
Inaugural meeting London 1989
Debate No 1: "The differentiation of anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa should be based upon binge eating rather than upon body weight."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Michael P. Bourke (IRL)
Christopher Fairburn (UK)
Arthur H. Crisp (UK)
Debate No 2: "The investigation of biological factors is more important for management of eating disorders than the understanding of cultural and familial factors."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
J. Hubert Lacey (UK)
Karl Martin Pirke (Germany)
Tilman Habermas (Germany)
Debate No 3: "Compulsory treatment of anorexia nervosa is more beneficial for the therapist rather than the patient."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Imela Florin (Germany)
Robert Palmer (UK)
Gerald Russell (UK)
Debate No 4: "Education campaigns will deviate resources and may be ineffective in reducing the incidence of eating disorders."

Chair:
Pro:
Con:
Edward Stonehill (UK)
???
Peter Slade (UK)
print
© G. Rathner 2005 | Weiherburggasse 1 A | A-6020 Innsbruck | fax: +43-512-58 36 54