Search results

edit: posted some OT stuff about Marc Alexander-Fluks (who seems to have posted some strange stuff in the past) as I thought he was the writer of this wiki post.

Other possible speakers who might be good for providing a patient perspective on the issues Cochrane have been ignoring (but might also not be interested in giving such a talk, especially when outside of the UK): - Carolyn Wilshire co-authored the PACE recovery paper with patients. - Leonard...

I thought most of your points were really good, but there's a slight danger with this one of playing into the 'anti-psychiatry' meme. It's difficult, because I think that some of the problems with how Cochrane have treated ME/CFS patients does stem from the view that ME/CFS is a mental health...

I was hoping that they'd be able to tell us! I've no idea what causes ME/CFS. I tend to assume that none of the current criteria are able to pick out a homogenous sub-group with a single cause of ill-health, but I'm not even confident about that.

I've totally given up on Sonya and Holgate doing the right thing. They have a clear responsibility to speak out against PACE, the way results were spun, and the way critics were smeared. I don't think that there's much chance of them doing that.

I find it hard to be consistently outraged when something manages to make them sound even worse than they really are. Still, in the long-run perfect accuracy about everything will serve us best. This article gets the key things right, and most of the details too.

Sorry - that way a typo/brain-glitch that I edited before you replied, but it looks like after you started your reply. I meant to write 'insufficiently socialist'. I think I was largely discussing politics with American conservatives, who tended to use 'liberal' as an insult for all who were on...

I think that there could also be differences between the US and UK? In the US 'liberal' seems to more mean 'left'. I know that when I first started discussing politics with Americans on-line I found their use of 'liberal' quite confusing. Also, this article is very UK-centric. Blair played a...

All terms like this are a bit difficult, but I think that it's fair to tie aspects of the current British Establishment's assumptions about individual's responsibilities in life (including for their health) to aspects of a 'neo-liberal' project. This is all complicated by the fact that there...

Questions they're asking - maybe worth discussing that here now?: What would make the conference appealing? Think about things you’d like to do, hear or discuss at the conference What would make it easy for you/others to attend and participate? This might include practical considerations...

This is clearly ME related politics imo. One could argue that a lot of the PACE stuff is more political than 'science'. There are probably no clear lines with rule #12, but this thread has got to be okay imo.

Maybe it would be good to ask them to explain why it was that patient concerns (specifically the published responses from Courtney and Kindlon) were allowed to be dismissed without proper explanation in their review of exercise therapy? Having patients involved should mean that those at Cochrane...

There are a lot of problems today, but I'm not sure things have ever been that great. Seems like there need to be constant battle against abuses of power. I think things have gotten worse for disabled people in the UK, but there's been progress in other areas. Hard to know how things balance out...

I wonder what inside knowledge she has which is leading her to think this is a sensible strategy for her. Presumably she's confident that Action for ME and the ME Association will not push for accountability over her falsehoods, and that they won't cause trouble with the CMRC or MEGA. It's...

I thought this was a good piece. Great to have Watts speaking out on issues like this, and in the Wessely letter. A good 'un?

He's the philosopher-king of British psychiatry.

It's Jo Daniels, who has been doing poor CFS stuff for years. I wonder who organised this, surely even Action for ME wouldn't choose to have her speaking (I really shouldn't assume that... AfME consistently astound me)?

Thanks for all the comments. I totally missed this paper when it came out.

I'd assume so.

I'd assume he meant 'unrelated to the vaccine'. I've not looked at the studies myself, but saw a discussion of them which made them sound solid (I realise that's not a great way of making a judgement on these things).