Perhaps the retreat to treating quiescent and appreciative cancer patients, rather than cantankerous and contumacious ME patients, has been a long established trope within the BPS world and the intended retirement is only loosely associated with alleged intimidation. This was Wessely in the...
Just had a quick look through the national archives DWP file. It looks to be in the minutes of a meeting dated 30 March 1992 beginning at page 139. Sorry I can't help with copying that.
I am sure this was recognised by others in 1989 which makes me wonder just how much communication they had with doctors outside their own little cult before describing their new condition. I am sure that that is in part what led to the belief that if, this is what they were seeing in patients...
Is the phrase "crowdfunded by a global band of CFS/ME sufferers...." strictly compliant with this anti-bias provision:
We must also be on guard against bias in our choice of words. Words like “claimed” or “according to” can suggest we doubt what is being said. Words like “fears” or “hopes”...
Well that clears that up. I must have mistaken the suppressed glee at the prospect of all those spondulicks for ironic self deprecation. I suppose I should have known better. Oxford has always seemed happy to bend over backwards to prostitute itself. It would probably bend over forwards if it...
Chalder must be a slow learner. Thirty years and still doesn't get the basics.
And how can one assess whether cognitive and behavioural responses are helpful or unhelpful. It all depends upon the criteria for assessment. The bases for selecting those criteria are subjective.
Outrageous isn't it, the thought that science could be bent by campaigning, when business interests may have to pay good money to have their views represented?
It looks as though SW is again trying to pretend that his undated letter to Aylward which was received on 6 OCT 1993 never existed. Its contents are misdescribed by Cosmicella but then its existence has been misdescribed by SW.
She does not sound intimidated.
I wonder how he can be so sure that "speaking to some of your science colleagues" would change her mind. What does he know, that we do not?
This reminds me of a gardening book, upon which I used to rely, where it was said that taxonomists are not scientists. They merely do work upon which scientists may, or may not, take note. I paraphrase.
The comments on the full recording are at about 1.46.00. There are difficulties. The comments are made off camera. The person making them is introduced as Mike, so the claim that it is Sharpe may well be correct. It is impossible to see the body language but there is something about the tone of...
This then is the @Paul Watton tweet as shown in the edited version of the Reuters article. It is not clear whether all the outlets which took the syndicated story have made the modifications to include this. Fair, unbiased reporting might have pointed out that the claim of arrogance was not...
Strange isn't it. And during the "phoney war" when it was presumed that we were being observed, I thought it was made clear that we were aware of the Reuter's purported standards. They were warned.
That description seems to broadly fit the concept of Abnormal Illness Behaviour as described by Pilowsky in 1969 and which David, Wessely and Pelosi thought, in 1988, lay at the root of the condition.
This is a link to the Reuters handbook of standards
handbook.reuters.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
These are the overall standards:
The 10 Absolutes of Reuters Journalism
Reuters journalists:
Always hold accuracy sacrosanct
Always correct an error openly
Always strive for balance and...
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.