Paul Garner on Long Covid and ME/CFS - BMJ articles and other media.

@Kitty , she is already aware of the draft guidelines

The comment re Bath cfsme Clinic related to the LongCovid clinics, now being offered.

Subsequent messages show many #LC advocates are now becoming aware of the ‘services’ they will be offered......

https://twitter.com/user/status/1356737171496046594

Done

ETA Not an MECFS diagnosis. Ref to Bath related to ‘Long Covid services’

 

Emma Wooller
@WoollerEmma
I was also also rather disturbed when googling motivational intervention to come across a 'CBT for CFS Manual' published in August 2020 and currently available on @RUHBath webpage for their Paediatric ME/CFS service.

thread here:
https://www.s4me.info/threads/cbt-f...tal-bath-uk-loades-m-e-starbuck-j-2020.16652/

 

"Published 14 July 2020"

 

This reminded me of Clare Gerada on BBC Breakfast:
https://twitter.com/user/status/1356315137976672259


Meanwhile, @Caroline Struthers has uploaded the full interview to YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0JYnwROQyE

Remember you can give it a thumbs down.

 

Weird. And fishy.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1357331166739709957

 

What I really don't understand is, why do these people just dig themselves in deeper, lash out at their critics, when it would be so easy to apologise?

"Apologies for the confusion, I suggested the other day that exercise is good for all medical problems. It is more accurate to say that exercise is good for many, but not all medical problems"

"Apologies for falsely giving the impression that I made myself better by being positive. I would like to acknowledge that there was a lot of luck involved. I'm in no way implying that those who don't recover are at fault for not being positive enough. I'd also like to thank the people with ME and Long Covid who helped and supported me during my illness... I'm truly grateful and your advice was very valuable".

How easy would that be? But no, we gotta play the misunderstood victim, the injured party.

 

Worth remembering that these are the 0.1% of medics who find they have a need to advertise themselves on twitter through blurting out trendy opinions. The Alain de Botton thread is apt. There is a desperate need to be loved perhaps.

 

Why not be loved by saying these magical words: we got it wrong with ME and want to make it right now. Let's talk how to make this happen.

They won't do this because they're trying to maintain the illusion of being perfect.

 

Maybe ask M. de Botton.

 

While I'm no fan of labelling people with these types of generalised non-specific disorders I scrolled for narcissism and this picture spoke volumes Titter

 

I've only had a brief read but that's a shocker.

To blatantly state it's not "all in your head" and then present a psychological explanation for the condition, no biomed information at all or context and so on - aka IAIYH. Beyond madness. I hope this gets challenged - this is all about increasing activity - aka CBT/GET - which hopefully NICE will continue to drop in the published guidelines. There will defo be no excuses then.

 

Only a couple of months to go for NICE now

 

Narcissist never apologize and love to block people. They always need to feel loved. Trust me, I grew up with one.

 

I saw some genuinely unpleasant and unreasonable tweets sent to them, and I've not seen those responsible apologise, so a lot of that could apply to them too.

Also, on a personal story front, is it innately worse to imply that you improved your health by being positive rather than, for example, that your health was made worse by GET?

I feel as if I'm viewing this dispute from a totally different perspective to a lot of the people posting here. My expectation is that to most of those in academia, and the general public, those criticising Garner (accepting the assumption that it's legitimate to group them all together) will seem much worse than Garner himself.

 

She said that exercise was good for everything and it has been pointed out to her that there are some conditions that exercise is not good for. She was wrong on a fact she had stated so people corrected her. I have made mistakes of fact on this forum and when people have corrected me I have apologised and learnt something.

 

She makes a big thing of saying 'in moderation', which could be interpreted as making her claim pretty meaningless, but I certainly see Gerada as way worse than Garner.

 

I think the difference is that most of us don't think it's true that they'll see it that way. Undoubtedly some will, of course, but that's why it's important to object. It's not acceptable for influential people to punch down at those with chronic illness.

(Small edits for clarity!)