Podcast: TWiV Special: David Tuller is PACEman

[Andy]

David Tuller returns to provide an update of his investigative work to expose the methodological and ethical problems with the PACE trial for ME/CFS.

http://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-special-david-tuller-paceman/

 

[Sasha]

Nice t-shirt, @dave30th!

 

[dave30th]

Nice t-shirt, @dave30th!

Yes, it's one-of-a-kind, thanks to Anil! I don't wear it much because I don't want to wear it out. Only for appropriate occasions.

 

[Trish]

Excellent interview thank you @dave30th

 

[Wonko]

This content requires a premium subscription.

 

[Esther12]

Started playing okay for me, and I've not got any premium subscription.

Thanks to Tuller and Racaniello (although I've not listened through yet).

 

[dave30th]

It shouldn't require any subscription.

 

[Wonko]

It shouldn't require any subscription.

It doesn't appear to now, last night it insisted it did (Chrome, windows 7 - although the same system now says it can play).

 

[Tom Kindlon]

 

[Guest 102]

This is brilliant, just listened, will tweet the podcast.

 

[RuthT]

Listening. Love the idea of exploring how the PACE authors use the English language - certainly seem to be adept at stretching words & definitions to fit.

Thank you @dave30th

 

[Forbin]

A great little bit comes near the end at 1:06:20, when they're talking about a response they got from Psychological Medicine suggesting that they should try to replicate the PACE study.

David: "What are we supposed to do? Replicate a study in the sense that we're supposed to come up with a protocol, change all the outcome measures at baseline... in the middle of the study? Is that how you replicate the study? The study's not replicable!"

 

[Sean]

"I should write a PACE lexicon"

Ambrose Bierce would have had fun with them.

 

[Alvin]

David: "What are we supposed to do? Replicate a study in the sense that we're supposed to come up with a protocol, change all the outcome measures at baseline... in the middle of the study? Is that how you replicate the study? The study's not replicable!"

It can be replicated, its just a very stupid thing to do. It would be like being in the middle of the ocean on a rubber boat and seeing what happens of you put a hole in the bottom. Logic says you will sink but lets pretend we can't foresee that and test it
Oh and we will bill the taxpayers 5 million pounds to run this test since we want to replicate it faithfully....

Though i would think ethical considerations will get in the way, harming patients intentionally is unethical and probably forbidden somewhere. Citing alternative facts wont change that.

 

[Peter]

Great interview and thanks again for your interest and relentless good work. You give great insight to the challenge, the magnitude, all the different parts that needs attention. In the end I like the “I basically have no strategy, I just want these people to behave like scientists”.

 

[Barry]

Great interview and thanks again for your interest and relentless good work. You give great insight to the challenge, the magnitude, all the different parts that needs attention. In the end I like the “I basically have no strategy, I just want these people to behave like scientists”.

Absolutely. They forever strive to bump up their credentials as scientists, but in truth reinforce their image more as shamans.

 

[Sly Saint]

"The problem is that not all good science is published in these luxury journals, and not all of what they publish is good! Yet, when it comes to hiring, promotion, and funding, the committees involved make decisions based on the journal and not the contents of the paper."

"There is another problem in scientific publishing which revolves around the fact that the research we do is supported by tax dollars, but many journals keep scientific papers behind a paywall – so the public can’t see what they are paying for. This practice is also unacceptable, but it drives profits for journals."

"I think scientists must take part of the blame for a science-disinterested public. Few of us take the time to tell the public what we are doing; we leave that to science writers. Some of these writers do a good job, but most do not and they certainly do not have the passion that we do for the subject. And as you surely know, passion for the subject is the key to teaching."

http://www.virology.ws/2018/09/18/a-phd-lab-coat-ceremony/

 

[Barry]

"The problem is that not all good science is published in these luxury journals, and not all of what they publish is good! Yet, when it comes to hiring, promotion, and funding, the committees involved make decisions based on the journal and not the contents of the paper."

"There is another problem in scientific publishing which revolves around the fact that the research we do is supported by tax dollars, but many journals keep scientific papers behind a paywall – so the public can’t see what they are paying for. This practice is also unacceptable, but it drives profits for journals."

"I think scientists must take part of the blame for a science-disinterested public. Few of us take the time to tell the public what we are doing; we leave that to science writers. Some of these writers do a good job, but most do not and they certainly do not have the passion that we do for the subject. And as you surely know, passion for the subject is the key to teaching."

http://www.virology.ws/2018/09/18/a-phd-lab-coat-ceremony/

"I wish you all a fulfilling career in this wonderful field, and don’t forget to always be curious, passionate, and kind."

What a great sign-off.