Special Report - Online activists are silencing us, scientists say Reuters March 2019

We need to get the NIH to publish a position paper that debunks this ridiculous narrative that PACE is being unfairly criticized, or that patients are hostile to researchers in general or criticize because they "don't like" the findings as opposed to the methodology being terrible and misleading.

This fully aligns with the effort to bring in more researchers and increase the quality of the science in this area. The Science Media Center propaganda is discouraging researchers from entering the field. I suspect that is exactly the point too. They don't want competition for CBT/GET or more people signing open letters.

An updated IOM report which includes a section on treatments would also be useful.
 
Jesus :emoji_face_palm:
Do you have a link to his speech?
Not in so many words but he said that it was up to us to keep applying pressure, knowing full well that we are unable to do so and that it has led us nowhere despite decades of trying. The only meaningful change happened when institutions did their job, like the IOM report. Nothing that we do on our own has any effect and he knows this.

Then he talked about hope without action being demoralizing and... announced no action. Funding is actually going down next year.

So he didn't say those words but might as well have.
 
So now the guy who wrote the slanderous article implying, once more, some unspecified misconduct blocked everyone on Twitter who corrected him. Most of us only politely sent him published research. And of course he's supposedly a "skeptic", somehow they always manage to be the most gullible out there. What pathetic cowards these people are.

Random idiots can publish lies about us and not give a damn. Doesn't matter that it's slanderous, as long as they don't name names it's all good, damn the consequences for us. Which in some cases is death following years of abuse and willful neglect that would amount to criminal behavior if we had a "respectable" disease and not on some blacklist of diseases to hate. How great is that? This is ridiculous. I mean, even Reuters isn't bothered by publishing misleading claims and basic factual errors. The editors stand by those.

What the hell are we supposed to do? And Sharpe knows damn well what he's doing, that he is hurting us on purpose, and no one is bothered by that, not even the university that employs him has issues with one of their professors unethically slandering sick people begging for their lives and repeating baseless lies that have disastrous consequences.
 
There is one rules in place for the protection of people yet none of them apply to people with ME. I have wondered about it for years.

Before anyone enters a clinical trial they must be warned of all possible harms they may experience but not in ME. Patient surveys may be self selected so only people who experienced a bad effect will answer them but the absolute numbers are still large even if the proportions do not match the wider population. Yet participants are no warned.

Ethical research on children, forget it. I could go on and on but you all know what I mean already.
 
upload_2019-9-7_13-16-19.png
Why would any patients want Kate Kelland reporting on anything to do with CFS?
I think the questioner was being sarcastic towards KK, saying that given she seems to consider herself such a self-proclaimed expert on ME in her writings, then she cannot fail to know about the OMF Symposium and the scientist there. Effectively challenging KK to abandon her BPS-biased crap and get in touch with some real science and scientists.
 
View attachment 8362

I think the questioner was being sarcastic towards KK, saying that given she seems to consider herself such a self-proclaimed expert on ME in her writings, then she cannot fail to know about the OMF Symposium and the scientist there. Effectively challenging KK to abandon her BPS-biased crap and get in touch with some real science and scientists.

Yes, but that's a challenge we don't want her to take up!
 
Yes, but that's a challenge we don't want her to take up!
Why not? If she cocks it up and slants her reporting it will be very easy to expose it for what it is, and show the shallowness and falseness of her reporting. And if she genuinely became better enlightened about some of the real science of ME that would also be good; would not be the first time an enemy transitioned to ally. I like this person's challenge. In truth I doubt KK has the bottle to take it up anyway.
 
Just thought I should make clear that it's not like I'm really concerned by the posted tweet or anything. I can post about being annoyed by some of the tweets I see on twitter, so it could be people think I am here.

I also think Kelland has shown she is terrible and that her bad work effectively harms us though. I don't think that there's any real chance of her ever doing good reporting on CFS.
 
It is important that the likes of her and our friend Michael are shown to be unwilling to educate themselves about the latest science of a disease they claim to have expert knowledge of. They can only state there is no physical effects because they ignore every opportunity to find out that there are such things.
 
Merged thread

Rolling eyes. Michael Sharpe is at it smearing patients once more.

https://web.archive.org/save/https:...-quits-because-online-trolls-are-too-hostile/


It is quite nasty. Didn’t he announce before he was quitting before and why didn’t he leave then? Playing victim again?

Just a section of it here...

But many some who suffer from the disease, as well as some who study it, have objected to his research, particularly the PACE trial, one of the largest projects on ME/CFS to date, which suggested that exercise and talk therapy may help treat it.

Critics saw the exercise component as flying in the face of the diagnostic criteria of their disease, and the therapy portion as dismissing ME/CFS as a mental health issue.

Many went beyond questioning the research, however, calling Dr Sharpe and his colleagues ‘charlatans‘ and worse.

And that‘s not to mention the countless vitriolic emails that inundated Dr Sharpe‘s inbox.

Some activists are calling for review and replication of Dr Sharpe‘s research – a valuable way of settling scientific disputes.

On the other hand, trolls – including Russian bots in some cases – have fueled dangerous crusades like the anti-vaxxer movement that has made measles a public health threat in the US.

And their social media aggression may be scaring scientists away from doing research in some of the areas it‘s needed most, like ME/CFS.

Dr Sharpe, according to his own Oxford University profile, focuses on complementary psychiatric care for patients with medical conditions.

Edit to add: this is the definition of gaslighting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Classy news outlet he's chosen to announce it in this time. If that's the only place he can get his resignation announcements published now I find it most encouraging. Next to a study showing that marijuana gives women better orgasms, and stories about a vicar getting caught having affairs with two women and 250 Amish men carrying a barn (you'd think they'd have included a picture with that).
 
Back
Top Bottom