Search results

Nick Brown is a PhD student with Coyne, and has made some comments on PACE.

How can they think that response is a good idea? It reads like: "We are not able to engage in any open debate on these issues, so instead, we have been doing all we can to apply pressure behind closed doors." My partner was imagining Bristol Uni having a little chat with Esther: "This American...

It's worth discussing where we think there are problems with an article, but I agree that it's also wise to remember that nothing will be perfect, and that we should be able to take some satisfaction from coverage that at least seems to be moving in the right direction.

Thanks Tom and MEmermaid.

I think it's good to try to see a range, rather than screen people on the basis of their views, then write a paper about their views. I'm deeply suspicious of all qualitative work like this tbh, but it's probably most useful when the researchers involved do as little as possible to manage the...

Not open access! Was there a very similar paper to this recently too? Maybe I'm just confused and they're really the same thing.

Although pictures of sick children do emerge, so there must be a way of getting consent. Although I'm not sure that Crawley's understanding of the issues around informed consent is the best.

Bumping because today's the day, but tbh i don't really understand how this works on FB.

Thanks for that Denise.

It looks like she's a regular columnist on health issues, rather than someone who did a big investigative report. By those standards, and despite the flaws, this is a good sign of the narrative turning against the PACE crew. When so much is unknown, and there's so much misinformation around, it...

It would be good to know what is said, but I doubt I'll ring in from the UK.

I think @Barry responded better than I could. That lot often imply more than they say, and then offended when patients criticise things that they didn't exactly say. It's a cycle that we normally end up coming out worse from, so I think it's worth trying to be as precise as possible, making sure...

I thought that this bit really reflected the Fink spin on things, but other than that it's not too bad.

I thought that this blog was a bit loose in some points, as Crawley/Bristol can be quite evasive with their language. eg: Crawley actually said that ""I couldn't put a picture of a patient up today, because I was really worried about them being attacked, like I am attacked. It is the nature...

LOL. WTF? Wibble-wibble...

That does read like a rather confused article. LOL at 'weeks'.

Although if participants receiving an experimental drug are given reasons for positive expectations of it's effect, I'd still expect that to lead to greater biasing of subjective outcomes. Yes, that seems an important thing to examine when looking at these sorts of problems. Did you see...

Completely agree with the positive thanks in the first post... feel a bit sorry for those who donate to Action for ME in the hope of helping people though.

Best wishes to everyone on this. I thought it was pretty unlikely to be an effective treatment for me personally, as I was assuming it would be a null result, although with a substantial chance of finding a positive effect for a sub-group of patients. But even with that scepticism, I still saw...

I never have. I could do though. Thanks, I'll bear it in mind.