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

Yes, magical thinking is WAY less dangerous than magical thinking dressed up in an artificial science suit.

 

In response to a tweet that says

Paul Garner replies

Original tweet

which I think highlights his lack of understanding. For starters, LC includes people who have organ damage, so how they can be said to have a fatigue syndrome I don't know.

 

It is hard to know to what he is saying "absolutely". Is it "are there differences?" or " perhaps patient groups should come together"?

 

Absolutely.

(I don't think other LC sufferers are impressed from the replies on that thread.
I see Michael Sharpes supporter (@cfs_research) has joined in to support PGs account of recovery.)

 

With his history, I just read it as something psychosomatic doctors like to say

"Of course your symptoms are real."

At first as a naive patient you think you're being taken seriously but what it means is

"they are there but not of physical origin."

 

Yes, and besides, it is not validation that patients want, but treatment.

 

The BMJ’s editor in chief has now rejected my complaint about PG’s blog:

I’m not minded to escalate it to COPE as its website states: “The primary role of the Facilitation and Integrity Subcommittee is not to adjudicate complaints, but instead to facilitate the resolution of disputes in a manner that is consistent with COPE's mission.” I can’t see that getting me very far but I may reconsider.


Meanwhile, as predicted, the BBC is taking the maximum time to make a decision on my complaint about CG’s long covid interview. They sent me an automated email on 5 February apologising for not replying in 2 weeks as they do with most complaints. No word since. I will chase it up if I don’t hear soon. I guess they may be waiting to be told by the relevant important people on what grounds they should reject it.

 

In view of who he is it will be read in that capacity tho - which is kinda the point, as the BMJ person knows.

 

Yes. This was my reply to their initial rejection of my complaint, to which the above was their repsonse:

“Dear Cat,

Thank you for your reply. You may not be surprised to learn that I disagree with your decision. The blog clearly went far beyond one person’s reflections on their individual patient experience.

First, Paul Garner is not just any patient. As stated below his BMJ articles, he is a professor of infectious diseases at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Director of the Centre for Evidence Synthesis in Global Health and Co-ordinating Editor of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group.

Second, he addresses his blog to his “fellow covid-19 long haulers” – in other words, he is giving advice to patients as a medical professional, in a medical journal.

Third, part of his implicit advice to people with long covid is not to listen to people who are unwell with ME/CFS. That is not only bad advice, it is also deeply offensive to people with ME/CFS.

Fourth, he is promoting treatment approaches for which there is no reliable evidence of efficacy and for which there is strong evidence of harm.

Fifth, he directly contradicts what he wrote in his previous blogs.

All the above raise serious questions not only about his judgment but also about the BMJ’s editorial standards.

Before I decide whether to refer this matter to COPE, please can you answer the following questions.

In general, does the BMJ consider it acceptable for people writing Opinion articles to:

1) Make assertions, including opinions which might reasonably be interpreted as medical advice, which directly contradict assertions they have made in previous Opinion articles in the same series?

2) Encourage patients to try treatment approaches for which there is no reliable evidence of efficacy and strong evidence of harm (as determined by the CDC and NICE)?

3) Insult or offend people on the basis of their illness or disability?

Please can you also let me know if your decision is considered definitive by the editor in chief? If not, please let me know the process for escalating my complaint.

Thank you,

Robert Saunders”

 

The message one gets from the BMJ is that patients should only listen to the advice they want to hear. Can they sink any lower?

 

Yes, this is about as clear as someone saying "You can't exercise too much if you have ME."

 

This was posted on another forum I'm on tonight:

 

My understanding, and how it worked with BMJ in the case of Professor Crawley's school absence study, was that COPE was a venue for its members to pose their dilemmas and seek input/responses--not as a place accepting complaints from outsiders.

 

Duh...
https://twitter.com/user/status/1366688689087270913


https://twitter.com/user/status/1366698876774748162


ETA: I am baffled that he's turning on the ME Association after Dr Shepherd took his own time and energy to help him when he was struggling to recover from Covid. Wow...

 

Oh for gods sake. Paul Garner’s tweets are just more and more distressing. What does he even mean, “Don’t help people recover”. Why is he bringing up this old article?

 

They are panicking and resorting to personal attacks because they've lost the scientific debate.