Esther Crawley

Valentijn said:
Yes, she has been deliberately and knowingly dishonest about some things. In light of that, it is hard to believe that her career is built upon well-intentioned and innocent mistakes. At best, she may believe that it's okay to lie to get the result which she earnestly believes is the right outcome.

For example, she might be completely convinced that CBT/GET/LP can cure ME/CFS, so deliberately abuses scientific methodology and basic facts to "prove" they are they cure. She might believe that she's doing the right and honorable thing with her work, and that patients would only oppose her work if they were unhinged militants.

Her view of the world may be fueled by delusions, but she is certainly willing to deliberately lie and engage in pseudoscience to create support for those delusions. That also suggests she feels a substantial indifference or even hostility toward those who disagree with her, if not with patients in general. Basic human compassion does not stop her from attacking others in the process of defending her beliefs.
Click to expand...
http://mentalhealthdaily.com/2015/05/13/delusions-of-persecution-causes-symptoms-treatment/
 
I just saw some stuff from NIHR promoting their Patient and Public involvement in research, and it reminded me of this annoying Crawley blog they posted earlier in the year, where she present herself as bravely producing useful research in the face of unreasonable opposition:

https://www.nihr.ac.uk/blogs/doing-what-is-right-in-a-controversial-field/5370

Also, here are some slides from a talk she gave at the NIHR (these are quite interesting - and present Sonya and Action for ME as on her side):

https://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-support/documents/Day 1 - Career journey Ester Crawley.pdf

Crawley is also on an NIHR review board choosing which projects to fund. The projects were approved in the process she was connected to:

DRF-2016-09-021
Depression in paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome
(CFS/ME)
Fund
Conditional

https://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-support/documents/Fellowships/NIHR DRF 2016 Public Minutes.pdf

DRF-2017-10-169

Developing an effective intervention for
younger children (5-11 years) with CFS/ME
Fund

https://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-...s/NIHR-DRF-Fellowship-2017-Public-Minutes.pdf

Crawley has talked about how the NIHR 'saved' her. Oh great.

This is the NIHR page on patient and public involvement. I wonder if there's any way of getting them to engage in debate over the merits of Crawley's work?

https://www.nihr.ac.uk/about-us/how...e/patient-and-public-involvement-in-research/
 
Last edited:
upload_2018-1-4_13-18-31.png
BBC news quote by the paediatrician Dr Esther Crawley from Voices from the Shadows website.

upload_2018-1-4_13-24-7.png

upload_2018-1-4_13-33-46.jpeg


"The activists have their own strange beliefs about exercise. It has never harmed anyone with ME...."
quote taken from Countrygirls notes at Crawleys last talk.
 
Last edited:
upload_2018-1-4_16-51-2.png

What a surreal response that is from a scientist. Oh, I need a brain surgeon. No worries, there's a butcher's shop nearby and that does a lot with brains.

Good to see EC accepts responsibility though ... I was beginning to wonder.
 
Sly Saint said:
BBC news quote by the paediatrician Dr Esther Crawley from Voices from the Shadows website.
"Children attending my specialist service only attend two days of school a week on average. This means that only the most severe cases are getting help"
Click to expand...
That's not correct. It means that a good number are missing less than two days of school a week, and a good number are missing more. If "days missing" is normally distributed, the numbers in these two groups (more vs. less than 2 days) will be more or less even.
 
Change of direction for Esther Crawley?

CONTRACT Study - CONservative TReatment of Appendicitis in Children (feasibility): study protocol for a randomised controlled Trial
Abstract
Background
Currently, the routine treatment for acute appendicitis in the United Kingdom is an appendicectomy. However, there is increasing scientific interest and research into non-operative treatment of appendicitis in adults and children. While a number of studies have investigated non-operative treatment of appendicitis in adults, this research cannot be applied to the paediatric population. Ultimately, we aim to perform a UK-based multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost effectiveness of non-operative treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children, as compared with appendicectomy. First, we will undertake a feasibility study to assess the feasibility of performing such a trial.
Click to expand...

https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-018-2520-z
 
Sly Saint said:
Change of direction for Esther Crawley?

CONTRACT Study - CONservative TReatment of Appendicitis in Children (feasibility): study protocol for a randomised controlled Trial


https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-018-2520-z
Click to expand...


I wonder what exactly is going on here. I have never previously come across the idea of doing a 'sort of' (or 'feasibility') study before, putatively, intending to do a proper study, other than the case of SMILE where it seems the sort of study turned out to be sort of the real study.

And I wonder what Dr Crawley, a paediatric rheumatologist, is doing as an author on a study of appendicitis? Is it that she is considered now to be an expert on sort of studies of this sort?
 
'A detailed programme of embedded qualitative and quantitative research to optimise recruitment to the feasibility RCT. It will also inform the design and conduct of any future RCT of non-operative treatment versus appendicectomy in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children.'

This could mean absolutely anything, or nothing. It sounds like bullshit to me.

I have a strong suspicion that this is a sort of trial to sort of see if appendicitis treatment can be made cheaper. So it will attract lots of money that could otherwise be used for looking after ill people.
 
Jonathan Edwards said:
And I wonder what Dr Crawley, a paediatric rheumatologist, is doing as an author on a study of appendicitis? Is it that she is considered now to be an expert on sort of studies of this sort?
Click to expand...
Well I suppose she is a sort of expert..........on what exactly seems to vary

expert on getting ethics approval, avoiding FOIs, dealing with troublesome parents...........coming up with names for trials.............making up definitions............the list is endless
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom