That may or may not be true. It is unclear.
What is, however, clear is that it was not the clue that started ME.
This is potentially dangerous territory.
I wondered that. It is clearly a deliberate act of provocation. Given her declared interest in long term conditions
www.sheffield.ac.uk/scharr/sections/hsr/cure/staff/mason_s
one has to presume that it is associated with that.
Until evidence to the contrary appears, we should perhaps absolve the writer from responsibility for the belief in a disconnect between brain and mind. It would however be interesting to know the beliefs of the editor on this question.
What would have been the procedure by which the decisions were made? Would they have been made by the chairman, the chairman acting in co-ordination with the officials, or the chairman rubber-stamping the decisions of officials?
Errors like this can easily occur in good faith. What matters is...
This story is obviously of much more importance than we realised. It even made the radio 4 one o'clock news. Those editors certainly have their ears to the ground.
Did Ramsay ever say that ME was caused by enteroviruses and only by enteroviruses? And would it only be people with confirmed enterovirus infection who could be deemed to have ME? This looks more like Hyde's version of ME than Ramsay's.
I suppose that one bright aspect of this is that it must be clear to all that to appoint a researcher in any way connected with matters currently under investigation would be an obviously flawed decision.
That struck me too. I thought that you could never confirm a hypothesis, unless it is so wide as to be meaningless, merely fail to disprove it and thus reinforce the belief.
Has new evidence been found to substantiate that claim? I thought the only evidence was a discussion which Byron Hyde had with one of the last surviving patients. If so, it would seem to undermine the whole origin myth, and would require a lot of rethinking.
I think we may have to be careful about rejecting this claim. It may be that it is a distortion of the truth, displaying the tendency to put SW1 at the centre of the universe, around which all revolve, rather than an outright fabrication.
A few weeks ago I did come across a reference to a...
All this talk of "mind" made me blow the dust off Bertrand Russell, both literally and metaphorically.
His comments are quite telling. The earliest known use of the concept, albeit in a rather different form, he attributes to Anaxagoras born about 500 BC and says "Both Aristotle and the...
I am amazed that it was allowed to remain up for so long. I never understood how someone who might wish to be called upon to act as an expert witness could be seen to be publicly making such demonstrably incorrect assertions about the Sunday Times image.
I had a very clear pattern of relapse/remission during the first eleven years. This followed an acute onset with atypical glandular fever - "atypical" because, although diagnosed by GP and consultant physician, the blood tests were negative. There was no period of complete recovery from the...
The book was The Hazards of immunisation by Sir Graham S Wilson (1967).
The reference to it was in a letter from Doris Jones appearing in the MRC National archives papers at p 78
It is. But with that sort of equation there needs to be proper recognition of those for whom risk turns into adverse events. It is not good enough to say that there are overall benefits for society. Those adversely affected need to be fairly evaluated and compensated.
I seem to recall...
I am not sure he can be criticised for this. He never stated what it was named before it became CFS, or who called it ME, having previously called it CFS.
I Know. I should get out more.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.