Search results

I wouldn't say it's damaging. I think I disagree with the emphasis of the blog, and I don't think that the proposed solution is likely to be useful (though I don't have a better solution, other than plugging away, hoping that continually pointing out problems with gradually lead to improvement...

edit: Here's an example of the cover: edit: This post was meant to be an edit to my above post, but I messed up and replied instead. Oh well.

Crawley said that the cover illustrating the Times 'harassment' article was an e-mail she had been sent (in her TEDx talk, and others too - an earlier talk implied that she had literally been sent the letter with threats in cut out magazine letters). This always seemed unlikely as it read like a...

I don't know if that "couldn't" is necessarily right. It could be that they just messed up by assuming that the Tribunal would simply trust these authority figures claiming that releasing PACE trial data showing they'd spun their results would put the lives of innocent patients at risk. We can't...

@ScottTriGuy That seems unlikely to me. There have been misrepresentations from them in the past, but they've generally not put a lot of time and effort into it. I think that any implication of fabrication is likely to be used against us and presented as evidence of an unhinged conspiratorial...

If we could have one big charity united in doing exactly what I thought they should, then that would be great. Unfortunately, it does seem like the larger charities are often less good. I've also thought that the largest UK MH charities seem pretty bad.

Reading the PhD theses of these people is really depressing. I've stopped doing it now. The next generation is looking to be even worse than what we have now - they're the followers of quacks! Thanks for the link though - good to have these things available to people.

I do see that there are problems with this survey. The main problem is probably that there will be so little time to get people to complete it though. It's not much time to make people aware of it.

I see that's a problem! I think it's best to focus criticism of AfME on the areas where they deserve it most though, to make sure it's clear what the problems that they urgently need to change are.

Personally, I'm not that keen on the whole 'do something pointless to raise money for charity' thing, but it's seems like it's a common approach that is used to raise money for other charities. Lots of people seem to like doing something a bit pointless as a way of raising money. Are the people...

I don't know. In isolation I think that's okay. There are so many good reasons to be annoyed with Action for ME, but it's worth avoiding being too critical when their tweets seem okay to me.

And just for those who don't know, Jessica Bavinton was a PACE trial researcher who has been heavily involved in promoting GET for a long time. Vitality 360 seems to do a lot of work with insurance companies, with another poster describing how their insurance company insisted that they work with...

I don't see much of a problem here (other than that it is raising money for Action for ME).

I'd assume that they're referring to this, from Larun & co of the piss-poor Cochrane exercise review: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/4/2/e003973 I have seen criticism of the above paper, but I can't remember the details.

A bit surprising they have a Conservative politician in that role. Given their links with the DWP, maybe not.

There's definitely been some progress, but if a lot of it is just adaptions to tone and the claims made public, while the same old people keep their positions of authority, then a lot of the signs of progress could make little difference to patients on the ground. We need to keep pushing as...

I found that this whole book was on-line while I was searching for something else, and thought I'd post it in case others wanted to be annoyed by some poorly justified assertions that will have made life more difficult for a lot of patients...

Search engines like Google will tend to keep returning results for a while with deleted pages. That's just how their system works.

Looks like he might have a personal connection:

I thought that the hoax project itself was over-hyped and not particularly illuminating, but at the same time I think it's important the academia stay open to self-criticism (even when not particularly well done) and I'm concerned by disciplinary proceedings being started against these...