Rethinking the treatment of CFS — a reanalysis and evaluation of findings from a recent major trial of GET and CBT (2018) Wilshire et al.

Sean said:
Sometimes it really is a conspiracy, in some form or other (and they take many forms).

Really disappointed in The Guardian. Their handling of this issue flies in the face of the way they tend to approach most other issues. For example, the Australian version has an economics writer (Greg Jericho) who is just superb, especially in his use and presentation of hard stats.

But on ME, the dear old Graudian is just disgraceful. I'd prefer they simply didn't publish anything on it at all. It would be an improvement.
Click to expand...

Agree, the Guardian has been woeful in its coverage of ME.
 
I'm generally a deep believer in things being cock-up rather than conspiracy*. Despite being more aligned politically to the Grauniad than the Mail, I think the former has been worse on ME because it has a worldview that is more deferential to doctors/scientists/the NHS. Whereas the Mail loves a ‘boffins got it wrong’ story. Either prejudice can get it wrong - the Guardian on ME, the Mail on MMR - but it is depressing to see a paper that proclaims to be on the side of the vulnerable often end up punching down.



*Talking of conspiracy, I think the Canary article by Steve Topple is likely to harm rather than help our cause - given his history of engaging in conspiracy theories and tropes many might consider anti-Semitic, he’s an ally I can do without thanks. If you wanted to give the impression that ME ‘activists’ are conspiracy-minded loons, he’s precisely the person you’d have advocating on PACE.
 
Carolyn Wilshire said:
Thanks, @Stewart and @large donner. People have sent me some excerpts from the trial seeing committee meetings, and I'm pretty shocked at the level of general cluelessness and also the degree of bias that was evident at all stages, in choice of measures, etc.

There are other people who are better placed than me to address issues like COIs and misrepresentations to the public and such like. But I'm interested in what those documents tell us about how the researchers made important research decisions - like omitting actometer data because the results may not have been pleasing to them.
Click to expand...

@Carolyn Wilshire We're discussing the TSC and TMG meetings over on this thread, if you'd like to join us: https://www.s4me.info/threads/pace-trial-tsc-and-tmg-minutes-released.3150/
 
I believe it's more about the fact that the health editor seems to have a very restrictive view of the illness. I wrote a very polite email to her when she wrote a piece about the benefits of the Lightning Process, which she responded to very curtly and said she wouldn't be replying to any further emails I would send :thumbsdown:
 
Healthwise's "Contact Us" webpage was broken, and their webmaster was grateful to me for letting her know about it.

Once fixed, I sent Healthwise a link to the paper, asking them yet again to consider removing CBT/GET from their ME/CFS materials.

Unsurprisingly, Healthwise didn't respond.
 
Last edited:
I think John Slater's comment (see post #190 above) really emphasises how vital it is for clinical trialling of behavioural remedies to control not just for trial-intervention-compensatory behaviour outside of the trial, but for illness-adjustment-changing behaviour outside of the trial, which as John clarifies was dramatic. The more I learn about PACE, the more it seems not just a badly controlled trial, but an out of control trial.
 
Via Peter Tatchell's twitter (linked above) I got to this link :

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/part_funding_of_the_pace_trial_b

A quote from the DWP on that link :

We believe that the findings of the trial will contribute to the
continuingly growing evidence base, which informs the development of
health and work related policy, policy based on the large body of
evidence showing that work is good for physical and mental wellbeing and
that being out of work can lead to poor health and other negative
outcomes.
Click to expand...

Whenever I read any kind of comment like this it always make me think of the Auchwitz entrance with its motto "Arbeit Macht Frei" (Work Sets You Free).
 
Arnie Pye said:
Via Peter Tatchell's twitter (linked above) I got to this link :

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/part_funding_of_the_pace_trial_b

A quote from the DWP on that link :



Whenever I read any kind of comment like this it always make me think of the Auchwitz entrance with its motto "Arbeit Macht Frei" (Work Sets You Free).
Click to expand...

I wrote this in a comment the other day but deleted it before publishing because of Godwin's Law. It's also the motto behind PACE, I feel.
 
Arnie Pye said:
Whenever I read any kind of comment like this it always make me think of the Auchwitz entrance with its motto "Arbeit Macht Frei" (Work Sets You Free).
Click to expand...

Iain Duncan Smith actually said "look work actually helps free people". Lord Freud abstacted disabled people into "Stock". I can why you would get the impression that that could only be done, publicly, in a society that approves of punishing poor people and other undesirables. (i.e the real world we live in)

The whole philosophy is a bastardisation of the banal fact that people with enough income to satisfy their wants and needs are healthier on average. Income was turned into 'work' because another way to increase income is by wealth redistribution policies to the poor.
 
Snow Leopard said:
To the above tweet Michael Sharpe simply said "Except it doesn't."
Click to expand...
giphy.gif


I always think of this gif when Sharpe and Wessely attempt to defend PACE.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top